Current:Home > FinanceHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -TradeGrid
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-17 00:49:57
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! (53)
Related
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- The rise of American natural gas
- Damian Lillard talks Famous Daves and a rap battle with Shaq
- Inflation eases to its lowest in over two years, but it's still running a bit high
- Nearly half of US teens are online ‘constantly,’ Pew report finds
- Project Runway All Stars' Rami Kashou on His Iconic Designs, Dressing Literal Royalty & More
- Shein steals artists' designs, a federal racketeering lawsuit says
- Our fireworks show
- North Carolina trustees approve Bill Belichick’s deal ahead of introductory news conference
- How Shein became a fast-fashion behemoth
Ranking
- A South Texas lawmaker’s 15
- A Clean Energy Trifecta: Wind, Solar and Storage in the Same Project
- The EV Battery Boom Is Here, With Manufacturers Investing Billions in Midwest Factories
- Sweden's Northvolt wants to rival China's battery dominance to power electric cars
- Why Sean "Diddy" Combs Is Being Given a Laptop in Jail Amid Witness Intimidation Fears
- Vanessa Hudgens' Amazon Prime Day 2023 Picks Will Elevate Your Self-Care Routine
- This electric flying taxi has been approved for takeoff — sort of
- The creator of luxury brand Brother Vellies is fighting for justice in fashion
Recommendation
A Mississippi company is sentenced for mislabeling cheap seafood as premium local fish
Protesters Rally at Gas Summit in Louisiana, Where Industry Eyes a Fossil Fuel Buildout
Amazon Prime Day 2023 Home & Kitchen Deals: Save Big on Dyson, Keurig, Nespresso & More Must-Have Brands
RFK Jr. is building a presidential campaign around conspiracy theories
Rylee Arnold Shares a Long
Olaplex Is on Sale for Amazon Prime Day 2023 at a Major Discount: Don’t Miss Out on Shiny, Strong Hair
Barbie's Simu Liu Reveals What the Kens Did While the Barbies Had Their Epic Sleepover
Save Up to $250 on Dyson Hair Tools, Vacuums, and Air Purifiers During Amazon Prime Day 2023