Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -ForexStream
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-16 21:14:57
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! (46246)
Related
- New Mexico governor seeks funding to recycle fracking water, expand preschool, treat mental health
- Kelly Ripa Shares How Miley Cyrus Influenced Daughter Lola’s Music Career
- 18-year-old Iowa murder suspect killed by police in Anaheim, California
- Jordan Chiles bumped off podium as gymnastics federation reinstates initial score
- Meet first time Grammy nominee Charley Crockett
- UNC women's soccer coach Anson Dorrance, who won 21 NCAA titles, retires
- How race, police and mental health collided in America's heartland | The Excerpt
- State House Speaker Scott Saiki loses Democratic primary to Kim Coco Iwamoto
- Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie return for an 'Encore,' reminisce about 'The Simple Life'
- Americans’ refusal to keep paying higher prices may be dealing a final blow to US inflation spike
Ranking
- NFL Week 15 picks straight up and against spread: Bills, Lions put No. 1 seed hopes on line
- New video proves Jordan Chiles inquiry was submitted in time, USA Gymnastics says
- Social Security's 2025 COLA will be announced in less than 2 months. Expect bad news
- Democrats launch first paid ad campaign for the Harris-Walz ticket in battleground states
- Nevada attorney general revives 2020 fake electors case
- This Is the Only Underwear I Buy My Husband (and It's on Sale)
- Jennie Garth Details “Daily Minefield” of Navigating Menopause
- Marijuana and ecstasy found inside Buc-ee's plush toys during traffic stop in Texas
Recommendation
Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
Jordan Chiles bumped off podium as gymnastics federation reinstates initial score
Travis Scott released with no charges after arrest at Paris hotel, reps say
Who will be on 2028 Olympic women's basketball team? Caitlin Clark expected to make debut
House passes bill to add 66 new federal judgeships, but prospects murky after Biden veto threat
Jennie Garth Details “Daily Minefield” of Navigating Menopause
Perseids to peak this weekend: When and how to watch the best meteor shower of the year
After another gold medal, is US women's basketball best Olympic dynasty of all time?