Current:Home > FinanceHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -StockSource
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-16 19:34:27
The Supreme Court decided 6-3 and 6-2 that race-conscious admission policies of the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution, effectively bringing to an end to affirmative action in higher education through a decision that will reverberate across campuses nationwide.
The rulings fell along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for both cases, and Justice Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh wrote concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has ties to Harvard and recused herself in that case, but wrote a dissent in the North Carolina case.
The ruling is the latest from the Supreme Court's conservative majority that has upended decades of precedent, including overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022.
- Read the full text of the decision
Here's how the justices split on the affirmative action cases:
Supreme Court justices who voted against affirmative action
The court's six conservatives formed the majority in each cases. Roberts' opinion was joined by Thomas, Samuel Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The chief justice wrote that Harvard and UNC's race-based admission guidelines "cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause."
"Respondents' race-based admissions systems also fail to comply with the Equal Protection Clause's twin commands that race may never be used as a 'negative' and that it may not operate as a stereotype," Roberts wrote. "The First Circuit found that Harvard's consideration of race has resulted in fewer admissions of Asian-American students. Respondents' assertion that race is never a negative factor in their admissions programs cannot withstand scrutiny. College admissions are zerosum, and a benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former at the expense of the latter. "
Roberts said that prospective students should be evaluated "as an individual — not on the basis of race," although universities can still consider "an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."
Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold affirmative action
The court's three liberals all opposed the majority's decision to reject race as a factor in college admissions. Sotomayor's dissent was joined by Justice Elena Kagan in both cases, and by Jackson in the UNC case. Both Sotomayor and Kagan signed onto Jackson's dissent as well.
Sotomayor argued that the admissions processes are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines a guarantee of racial equality," Sotomayor wrote. "The Court long ago concluded that this guarantee can be enforced through race-conscious means in a society that is not, and has never been, colorblind."
In her dissent in the North Carolina case, Jackson recounted the long history of discrimination in the U.S. and took aim at the majority's ruling.
"With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces 'colorblindness for all' by legal fiat," Jackson wrote. "But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life."
Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.
- In:
- Affirmative Action
- Supreme Court of the United States
veryGood! (3)
Related
- Who are the most valuable sports franchises? Forbes releases new list of top 50 teams
- South Korean president's party divided over defiant martial law speech
- Are Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp down? Meta says most issues resolved after outages
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- New Mexico governor seeks funding to recycle fracking water, expand preschool, treat mental health
- As Trump Enters Office, a Ripe Oil and Gas Target Appears: An Alabama National Forest
- New data highlights 'achievement gap' for students in the US
- Questlove charts 50 years of SNL musical hits (and misses)
- How to watch new prequel series 'Dexter: Original Sin': Premiere date, cast, streaming
- At site of suspected mass killings, Syrians recall horrors, hope for answers
Ranking
- Pregnant Kylie Kelce Shares Hilarious Question Her Daughter Asked Jason Kelce Amid Rising Fame
- The FBI should have done more to collect intelligence before the Capitol riot, watchdog finds
- Backstage at New York's Jingle Ball with Jimmy Fallon, 'Queer Eye' and Meghan Trainor
- Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
- The city of Chicago is ordered to pay nearly $80M for a police chase that killed a 10
- Backstage at New York's Jingle Ball with Jimmy Fallon, 'Queer Eye' and Meghan Trainor
- Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
- The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding
Recommendation
What to know about Tuesday’s US House primaries to replace Matt Gaetz and Mike Waltz
Woman dies after Singapore family of 3 gets into accident in Taiwan
Stamford Road collision sends motorcyclist flying; driver arrested
What to know about Tuesday’s US House primaries to replace Matt Gaetz and Mike Waltz
Can Bill Belichick turn North Carolina into a winner? At 72, he's chasing one last high
Intellectuals vs. The Internet
Trump suggestion that Egypt, Jordan absorb Palestinians from Gaza draws rejections, confusion
The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding