Current:Home > ContactHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -MarketLink
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-14 23:28:37
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! (9512)
Related
- Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
- Russia rejected significant proposal for Evan Gershkovich and Paul Whelan's release, U.S. says
- Bills GM says edge rusher Von Miller to practice and play while facing domestic violence charge
- Social Security's most important number for retirement may not be what you think it is
- Trump's 'stop
- Ex-NFL player Sergio Brown pleads not guilty to killing mother
- Queens man indicted on hate crime charges in attack on Jewish tourist in Times Square
- Arizona man charged over online posts that allegedly incited Australian attack in which 6 died
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- Serial killer's widow admits her role in British student's rape and murder: I was bait
Ranking
- Krispy Kreme offers a free dozen Grinch green doughnuts: When to get the deal
- Golf officials to roll back ball for pros and weekend hackers alike. Not everyone is happy
- He changed television forever. Why we all owe thanks to the genius of Norman Lear.
- Europe was set to lead the world on AI regulation. But can leaders reach a deal?
- A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
- Automakers, dealers and shoppers dawdle on EVs despite strong year in US sales growth
- 20 years later, 'Love Actually' director admits handwritten sign scene is 'a bit weird'
- Cyclone Michaung makes landfall on India's east coast as 17 deaths are blamed on the storm in Chennai
Recommendation
New Zealand official reverses visa refusal for US conservative influencer Candace Owens
Ex-NFL player Sergio Brown pleads not guilty to killing mother
'All the Little Bird-Hearts' explores a mother-daughter relationship
US finds both sides in Sudan conflict have committed atrocities in Darfur
'Vanderpump Rules' star DJ James Kennedy arrested on domestic violence charges
This Sparkly $329 Kate Spade Bag Is Now Just $74 – And It’s The Perfect Festive Touch To Any Outfit
Turn Meals Into Precious Holiday Memories With Giuliana Rancic’s Hosting Must-Haves
Intelligence report warns of rising foreign terror threats in U.S. amid Israel-Hamas war