Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Thrive Financial Network
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-18 06:15:39
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! (746)
Related
- Person accused of accosting Rep. Nancy Mace at Capitol pleads not guilty to assault charge
- New U.S., Canada, Mexico Climate Alliance May Gain in Unity What It Lacks in Ambition
- July has already seen 11 mass shootings. The emotional scars won't heal easily
- Kate Spade Memorial Day Sale: Get a $239 Crossbody Purse for $79, Free Tote Bags & More 75% Off Deals
- Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
- U.S., European heat waves 'virtually impossible' without climate change, new study finds
- Soon after Roe was overturned, one Mississippi woman learned she was pregnant
- Titan sub implosion highlights extreme tourism boom, but adventure can bring peril
- Could your smelly farts help science?
- First in the nation gender-affirming care ban struck down in Arkansas
Ranking
- Hackers hit Rhode Island benefits system in major cyberattack. Personal data could be released soon
- 'Anti-dopamine parenting' can curb a kid's craving for screens or sweets
- Government Think Tank Pushes Canada to Think Beyond Its Oil Dependence
- Teen who walked six miles to 8th grade graduation gets college scholarship on the spot
- Bill Belichick's salary at North Carolina: School releases football coach's contract details
- Kate Spade Memorial Day Sale: Get a $239 Crossbody Purse for $79, Free Tote Bags & More 75% Off Deals
- 'Anti-dopamine parenting' can curb a kid's craving for screens or sweets
- Don’t Miss This $80 Deal on a $180 PowerXL 10-Quart Dual Basket Air Fryer
Recommendation
Romantasy reigns on spicy BookTok: Recommendations from the internet’s favorite genre
Titan sub implosion highlights extreme tourism boom, but adventure can bring peril
Cyberattacks on hospitals 'should be considered a regional disaster,' researchers find
Video: A Climate Change ‘Hackathon’ Takes Aim at New York’s Buildings
'Malcolm in the Middle’ to return with new episodes featuring Frankie Muniz
'No kill' meat, grown from animal cells, is now approved for sale in the U.S.
McCarthy says he supports House resolutions to expunge Trump's impeachments
CDC tracking new COVID variant EU.1.1