Current:Home > StocksHere'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:2025-04-15 12:06:26
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! (127)
Related
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- No tiger found in Cincinnati so far after report of sighting; zoo tigers 'safe and sound'
- How Trump’s deny-everything strategy could hurt him at sentencing
- Gypsy-Rose Blanchard and family sue content creator Fancy Macelli for alleged defamation
- Louvre will undergo expansion and restoration project, Macron says
- Map shows states affected by recalled cucumbers potentially contaminated with salmonella
- Anthony Fauci faces questions during contentious COVID-19 hearing in the House
- Georgia's controversial, Russia-like foreign agent bill becomes law after weeks of protests
- Federal court filings allege official committed perjury in lawsuit tied to Louisiana grain terminal
- This morning's parade of planets proved underwhelming. NASA gave a date for an even better and brighter one.
Ranking
- The 401(k) millionaires club keeps growing. We'll tell you how to join.
- Kentucky governor unveils rental housing projects for region still recovering from 2021 tornadoes
- Rodeo Star Spencer Wright's 3-Year-Old Son Levi Dies After Toy Tractor Accident
- New Jersey plans to drop the bald eagle from its endangered species list
- 'No Good Deed': Who's the killer in the Netflix comedy? And will there be a Season 2?
- Cicadas are back, but climate change is messing with their body clocks
- Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey to seek independent reelection bid amid federal corruption trial
- Why jewelry has been an issue in Shilo Sanders' bankruptcy case: `Don’t wear it'
Recommendation
Macy's says employee who allegedly hid $150 million in expenses had no major 'impact'
In New York, Attorney General Letitia James’ Narrow View of the State’s Green Amendment
Group says it intends to sue US agencies for failing to assess Georgia plant’s environmental impact
Demi Lovato Details Finding the “Light Again” After 5 In-Patient Mental Health Treatments
Trump's 'stop
The US is hosting Cricket World Cup. Learn about the game
Federal investigators probing Indiana hot air balloon crash that injured 3
These 23 Pottery Barn Teen Items Work as Home Decor Gems for Modern Adults: Finds Starting at $4.99