Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Achieve Wealth Network
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-18 23:19:01
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! (65612)
Related
- What do we know about the mysterious drones reported flying over New Jersey?
- Shop Our Anthropologie 40% Off Sale Finds: $39 Dresses, $14 Candles & So Much More
- Rather than play another year, Utah State QB Levi Williams plans for Navy SEAL training
- Maine will give free college tuition to Lewiston mass shooting victims, families
- Louvre will undergo expansion and restoration project, Macron says
- Montana miner backs off expansion plans, lays off 100 due to lower palladium prices
- Dakota Johnson reveals how Chris Martin helped her through 'low day' of depression
- Eddie Murphy wants ‘Candy Cane Lane’ to put you in the Christmas spirit for years to come
- California DMV apologizes for license plate that some say mocks Oct. 7 attack on Israel
- Israel strikes Gaza after truce expires, in clear sign that war has resumed in full force
Ranking
- Meet the volunteers risking their lives to deliver Christmas gifts to children in Haiti
- Blinken urges Israel to comply with international law in war against Hamas as truce is extended
- Greek author Vassilis Vassilikos, whose political novel inspired award-winning film ‘Z,’ dies at 89
- Israel strikes Gaza after truce expires, in clear sign that war has resumed in full force
- Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
- 'May December' shines a glaring light on a dark tabloid story
- EPA proposes rule to replace all lead water pipes in U.S. within 10 years: Trying to right a longstanding wrong
- EPA proposes rule to replace all lead water pipes in U.S. within 10 years: Trying to right a longstanding wrong
Recommendation
Brianna LaPaglia Reveals The Meaning Behind Her "Chickenfry" Nickname
What to know about the Sikh independence movement following US accusation that activist was targeted
Kate Spade Flash Deal: This $538 Tote & Wallet Bundle Is on Sale for Just $109
College Football Playoff scenarios: With 8 teams in contention, how each could reach top 4
Highlights from Trump’s interview with Time magazine
Coup leader Guy Philippe repatriated to Haiti as many question his next role in country in upheaval
Penguin parents sleep for just a few seconds at a time to guard newborns, study shows
Democrats lose attempt to challenge New Hampshire electoral district maps