Current:Home > InvestHere'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:2025-04-15 16:37:04
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! (7)
Related
- Travis Hunter, the 2
- Widow of serial killer who preyed on virgins faces trial over cold cases
- Cardinals get AL Cy Young runner-up Sonny Gray to anchor revamped starting rotation
- Horoscopes Today, November 27, 2023
- Gen. Mark Milley's security detail and security clearance revoked, Pentagon says
- Tiffany Haddish says she will 'get some help' following DUI arrest
- Kate Spade 24-Hour Flash Deal: This $300 Backpack Is on Sale for $65 and It Comes in 4 Colors
- In new challenge to indictment, Trump’s lawyers argue he had good basis to question election results
- Friday the 13th luck? 13 past Mega Millions jackpot wins in December. See top 10 lottery prizes
- Sandy Hook families offer to settle Alex Jones’ $1.5 billion legal debt for a minimum of $85 million
Ranking
- Trump issues order to ban transgender troops from serving openly in the military
- Mysterious and fatal dog respiratory illness now reported in 14 states: See the map.
- Jennifer Lopez announces 'This Is Me…Now' album release date, accompanying movie
- Baltic nations’ foreign ministers pull out of OSCE meeting over Russian foreign minister attendance
- Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
- Climate funding is in short supply. So some want to rework the financial system
- A Husky is unable to bark after he was shot in the snout by a neighbor in Phoenix
- Security guard fatally shot at New Hampshire hospital remembered for dedication to community, family
Recommendation
Alex Murdaugh’s murder appeal cites biased clerk and prejudicial evidence
Texas abortion case goes before state's highest court, as more women join lawsuit
Baltic nations’ foreign ministers pull out of OSCE meeting over Russian foreign minister attendance
Audio intercepts reveal voices of desperate Russian soldiers on the front lines in Ukraine: Not considered humans
DeepSeek: Did a little known Chinese startup cause a 'Sputnik moment' for AI?
More than 303,000 Honda Accords, HR-V recalled over missing seat belt piece
Body of man reported missing Nov. 1 found in ventilation system of Michigan college building
Watch live: Tribute service for former first lady Rosalynn Carter continues