Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Wealth Nexus Pro
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 20:24:05
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! (695)
Related
- Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
- Gabbriette Bechtel Shares Rare Insight Into Relationship With Matty Healy
- Champions League final highlights: Real Madrid beats Dortmund to win 15th European crown
- Florida sheriff’s office fires deputy who fatally shot Black airman at home
- 2 killed, 3 injured in shooting at makeshift club in Houston
- The Top 12 Must-Have Lululemon Gifts for Father's Day 2024
- Taylor Momsen Shares Terrifying Moment She Was Bitten by Bat During Concert
- Former General Hospital star Johnny Wactor shot and killed in downtown LA, family says
- SFO's new sensory room helps neurodivergent travelers fight flying jitters
- Marian Robinson, mother of Michelle Obama, dies at 86
Ranking
- Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
- A strong economy means more Americans are earning $400K. What's it mean for their taxes?
- Swimmer Katie Ledecky on athlete doping scandals: I think our faith in some of the systems is at an all-time low
- From collapsed plea deal to trial: How Hunter Biden has come to face jurors on federal gun charges
- Why we love Bear Pond Books, a ski town bookstore with a French bulldog 'Staff Pup'
- Kansas Constitution does not include a right to vote, state Supreme Court majority says
- Nelly Korda among shocking number of big names who miss cut at 2024 U.S. Women's Open
- 3 Beauty Pros Reveal How to Conceal Textured Skin Without Caking On Products
Recommendation
A Mississippi company is sentenced for mislabeling cheap seafood as premium local fish
Chad Daybell Sentenced to Death for Murders of Stepchildren and First Wife
Champions League final highlights: Real Madrid beats Dortmund to win 15th European crown
LGBTQ communities, allies around US taking steps to promote safety at Pride 2024 events
Why we love Bear Pond Books, a ski town bookstore with a French bulldog 'Staff Pup'
Kansas Constitution does not include a right to vote, state Supreme Court majority says
State work-release prisoner killed in blast while welding fuel tank
The ANC party that freed South Africa from apartheid loses its 30-year majority in landmark election