Current:Home > NewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -FinanceMind
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-17 07:40:49
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! (88)
Related
- Why members of two of EPA's influential science advisory committees were let go
- Look Back on Bruce Willis' Best Roles
- Ellen Star Sophia Grace Cuddles Her Newborn Baby Boy in Sweet Video
- The White House is turning to TikTok stars to take its message to a younger audience
- Federal Spending Freeze Could Have Widespread Impact on Environment, Emergency Management
- Ellen Star Sophia Grace Cuddles Her Newborn Baby Boy in Sweet Video
- Fastest 'was' in the West: Inside Wikipedia's race to cover the queen's death
- King Charles III's coronation ceremony televised in the U.S.
- Trump's 'stop
- Andrew Tate gets banned from Facebook, Instagram, TikTok for violating their policies
Ranking
- Jamie Foxx gets stitches after a glass is thrown at him during dinner in Beverly Hills
- King Charles to reuse golden coronation robes worn by his predecessors
- Dancing With the Stars Finds Tyra Banks' Replacement in Co-Host Julianne Hough
- Goofy dances and instant noodles made this Japanese executive a TikTok star
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- A super fan collected every Super Nintendo game manual and made them free
- A former CIA engineer is convicted in a massive theft of secrets released by WikiLeaks
- As takeover battle heats up, Elon Musk subpoenas former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey
Recommendation
Who's hosting 'Saturday Night Live' tonight? Musical guest, how to watch Dec. 14 episode
As takeover battle heats up, Elon Musk subpoenas former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey
Why Biden's plan to boost semiconductor chip manufacturing in the U.S. is so critical
Police crack down on 'Ndrangheta mafia in sweeping bust across Europe
DoorDash steps up driver ID checks after traffic safety complaints
At the U.S. Open, line judges are out. Automated calls are in
King Charles' coronation will be very different from Queen Elizabeth's. Here's what the royals changed.
Bad Bunny Appears to Diss Kendall Jenner's Ex Devin Booker in New Song