Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -WealthSync Hub
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-18 03:12:01
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! (548)
Related
- The White House is cracking down on overdraft fees
- Why 'My Old Ass' is the 'holy grail' of coming-of-age movies
- Justice Department sues Alabama saying state is purging voter rolls too close to election
- Trump warns he’ll expel migrants under key Biden immigration programs
- Rams vs. 49ers highlights: LA wins rainy defensive struggle in key divisional game
- 'Dangerous rescue' saves dozens stranded on hospital roof amid Helene deluge
- The 26 Most Shopped Celebrity Product Recommendations This Month: Kyle Richards, Kandi Burruss & More
- Diddy lawyer says rapper is 'eager' to testify during trial, questions baby oil claims
- Meta donates $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund
- Tropical Weather Latest: Millions still without power from Helene as flooding continues
Ranking
- North Carolina trustees approve Bill Belichick’s deal ahead of introductory news conference
- Maryland man convicted of shooting and wounding 2 police officers in 2023
- Recent major hurricanes have left hundreds dead and caused billions in damages
- Ellen DeGeneres Shares Osteoporosis, OCD and ADHD Diagnoses
- A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
- Arkansas couple stunned when their black Nikes show up as Kendrick Lamar cover art
- Stephen Amell was focused on 'NCIS' spinoff when he landed 'Suits' gig
- ‘I love you but I hate you.’ What to do when you can’t stand your long-term partner
Recommendation
Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
CBS News says it will be up to Vance and Walz to fact-check each other in veep debate
After 20 years and a move to Berlin, Xiu Xiu is still making music for outsiders
Latest talks between Boeing and its striking machinists break off without progress, union says
North Carolina justices rule for restaurants in COVID
Miami Dolphins to start Tyler Huntley at quarterback against Titans
Jana Kramer Reveals She Lost “Almost Half Her Money” to Mike Caussin in Divorce
Tips to prevent oversharing information about your kids online: Watch