Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -MoneyMatrix
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 13:28:47
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! (78)
Related
- Can Bill Belichick turn North Carolina into a winner? At 72, he's chasing one last high
- Kourtney Kardashian Is Pregnant, Expecting First Baby With Husband Travis Barker
- Khloe Kardashian Congratulates Cuties Kourtney Kardashian and Travis Barker on Pregnancy
- Exxon climate predictions were accurate decades ago. Still it sowed doubt
- Google unveils a quantum chip. Could it help unlock the universe's deepest secrets?
- Eminent Domain Lets Pipeline Developers Take Land, Pay Little, Say Black Property Owners
- Judge overseeing Trump documents case agrees to push first pretrial conference
- A Week After the Pacific Northwest Heat Wave, Study Shows it Was ‘Almost Impossible’ Without Global Warming
- EU countries double down on a halt to Syrian asylum claims but will not yet send people back
- Inside Clean Energy: Coronavirus May Mean Halt to Global Solar Gains—For Now
Ranking
- Can Bill Belichick turn North Carolina into a winner? At 72, he's chasing one last high
- Huge jackpots are less rare — and 4 other things to know about the lottery
- Activists See Biden’s Day One Focus on Environmental Justice as a Critical Campaign Promise Kept
- Jeffrey Carlson, actor who played groundbreaking transgender character on All My Children, dead at 48
- Head of the Federal Aviation Administration to resign, allowing Trump to pick his successor
- Breathing Polluted Air Shortens People’s Lives by an Average of 3 Years, a New Study Finds
- Drive-by shooting kills 9-year-old boy playing at his grandma's birthday party
- Glasgow Climate Talks Are, in Many Ways, ‘Harder Than Paris’
Recommendation
NHL in ASL returns, delivering American Sign Language analysis for Deaf community at Winter Classic
Biden Heads for Glasgow Climate Talks with High Ambitions, but Minus the Full Slate of Climate Policies He’d Hoped
Covid-19 and Climate Change Will Remain Inextricably Linked, Thanks to the Parallels (and the Denial)
Migrant girl with illness dies in U.S. custody, marking fourth such death this year
North Carolina trustees approve Bill Belichick’s deal ahead of introductory news conference
2 boys dead after rushing waters from open Oklahoma City dam gates sweep them away, authorities say
Aviation leaders call for more funds for the FAA after this week's system failure
Coal-Fired Power Plants Hit a Milestone in Reduced Operation