Current:Home > ContactHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -WealthPro Academy
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 09:16:12
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! (1858)
Related
- All That You Wanted to Know About She’s All That
- Zayn Malik Shares Rare Insight Into Life Away From Spotlight With His Daughter Khai
- Kirk Cousins' recovery from torn Achilles leaves Falcons to play waiting game with star QB
- Internet mocks Free People 'micro' shorts, rebranding item as 'jundies,' 'vajeans,' among others
- New Zealand official reverses visa refusal for US conservative influencer Candace Owens
- Watch video of tornado in Northeast Kansas as severe storms swept through region Wednesday
- Titanic expedition might get green light after company says it will not retrieve artifacts
- Regina King Details Her Grief Journey After Son Ian's Death
- Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
- Titanic expedition might get green light after company says it will not retrieve artifacts
Ranking
- Brianna LaPaglia Reveals The Meaning Behind Her "Chickenfry" Nickname
- Hunter Biden trial on felony gun charges tentatively set for week of June 3
- New Mexico day care workers’ convictions reversed in 2017 death of toddler inside hot car
- ‘Manhunt,’ about hunt for John Wilkes Booth, may make you wish you paid attention in history class
- Nearly half of US teens are online ‘constantly,’ Pew report finds
- Dean McDermott Shares Insight Into Ex Tori Spelling’s Bond With His New Girlfriend Lily Calo
- Federal judge finds city of Flint in contempt over lead water pipe crisis
- Federal judge finds Flint, Michigan, in contempt for missing water line replacement deadlines
Recommendation
Israel lets Palestinians go back to northern Gaza for first time in over a year as cease
Cashews sold by Walmart in 30 states and online recalled due to allergens
These Crazy-Good Walmart Flash Deals Are Better Than Any Black Friday Sale, But They End Tomorrow
'Grey's Anatomy' begins its 20th season: See the longest running medical shows of all time
Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
A Georgia woman died after trying to get AirPod from under conveyor belt, reports say
Regina King reflects on her son's death in emotional interview: 'Grief is a journey'
Federal judge finds Flint, Michigan, in contempt for missing water line replacement deadlines