Current:Home > ScamsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -FinanceCore
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 18:13:49
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! (9)
Related
- Rolling Loud 2024: Lineup, how to stream the world's largest hip hop music festival
- 'Beetlejuice Beetlejuice' review: Michael Keaton's moldy ghost lacks the same bite
- 'Make them pay': Thousands of Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott hotel workers on strike across US
- Workers at General Motors joint venture battery plant in Tennessee unionize and will get pay raise
- EU countries double down on a halt to Syrian asylum claims but will not yet send people back
- Target brings back its popular car seat-trade in program for fall: Key dates for discount
- Injuries reported in shooting at Georgia high school
- NFL power rankings Week 1: Champion Chiefs in top spot but shuffle occurs behind them
- At site of suspected mass killings, Syrians recall horrors, hope for answers
- 1,000-Lb. Sisters' Amy Slaton Allegedly Had Mushrooms and Cannabis on Her When Arrested After Camel Bite
Ranking
- Intellectuals vs. The Internet
- New Northwestern AD Jackson aims to help school navigate evolving landscape, heal wounds
- How Wheel of Fortune's Vanna White First Reacted to Ryan Seacrest Replacing Pat Sajak
- Glow Into Fall With a $54.98 Deal on a $120 Peter Thomas Roth Pumpkin Exfoliant for Bright, Smooth Skin
- Appeals court scraps Nasdaq boardroom diversity rules in latest DEI setback
- Mayor condemns GOP Senate race ad tying Democrat to Wisconsin Christmas parade killings
- What’s Stalling Electric Vehicle Adoption in Wyoming?
- Ryan Reynolds honors late 'Roseanne' producer Eric Gilliland: 'It's a tragedy he's gone'
Recommendation
Why members of two of EPA's influential science advisory committees were let go
Lip Markers 101: Why They’re Trending, What Makes Them Essential & the Best Prices as Low as $8
Influencer Meredith Duxbury Shares Her Genius Hack for Wearing Heels When You Have Blisters
USC winning the Big Ten, Notre Dame in playoff lead Week 1 college football overreactions
IRS recovers $4.7 billion in back taxes and braces for cuts with Trump and GOP in power
Frances Tiafoe advanced to the US Open semifinals after Grigor Dimitrov retired injured
Search goes on for missing Virginia woman, husband charged with concealing a body
The CEOs of Kroger and Albertsons are in court to defend plans for a huge supermarket merger