Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Golden Summit Finance
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 10:08:40
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! (37)
Related
- Moving abroad can be expensive: These 5 countries will 'pay' you to move there
- Netanyahu says Israel won't bend to pressures after Biden suggests he abandon controversial judicial overhaul
- Jon Bernthal to Reprise His Role as the Punisher in Disney+'s Daredevil: Born Again
- Black TikTok Creators Are On Strike To Protest A Lack Of Credit For Their Work
- Head of the Federal Aviation Administration to resign, allowing Trump to pick his successor
- Drug trafficking blamed as homicides soar in Costa Rica
- Pentagon Scraps $10 Billion Contract With Microsoft, Bitterly Contested By Amazon
- Amsterdam warns British tourists planning messy trips to get trashed to simply stay away
- New data highlights 'achievement gap' for students in the US
- Hyundai Plant In Alabama Pauses Manufacturing Due To Car Chip Shortage
Ranking
- Tarte Shape Tape Concealer Sells Once Every 4 Seconds: Get 50% Off Before It's Gone
- Kelly Ripa and Ryan Seacrest Travel Back to Jurassic Park Just in Time for the Oscars
- This Outer Banks Stunt Double Editing Error Is Too Good to Ignore
- 4 people found dead near the beach in Cancun's hotel area
- Angelina Jolie nearly fainted making Maria Callas movie: 'My body wasn’t strong enough'
- Adidas won't challenge Black Lives Matter over three-stripes trademark
- This Affordable Amazon Swimsuit Is on Sale for Under $35 & Has Over 32,000 5-Star Reviews
- Adidas won't challenge Black Lives Matter over three-stripes trademark
Recommendation
'Kraven the Hunter' spoilers! Let's dig into that twisty ending, supervillain reveal
Clear Up Your Acne and Save 42% On These Sunday Riley Skincare Top-Sellers
Drew Barrymore Shares Her Realistic Self-Care Practices, Doesn't Do the F--king Bubble Baths
Brittney Griner says she has great concern for Wall Street Journal reporter held in Russia
North Carolina justices rule for restaurants in COVID
As Finland gets NATO membership, here's what it means and why it matters
FIFA removes Indonesia as host of Under-20 World Cup after protests over Israel
Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS Perfects Activewear With Squat-Proof Performance Collection