Current:Home > MyHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -WealthMindset Learning
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-12 12:25:37
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! (83484)
Related
- John Galliano out at Maison Margiela, capping year of fashion designer musical chairs
- ‘Last Gasp for Coal’ Saw Illinois Plants Crank up Emission-Spewing Production Last Year
- California Passed a Landmark Law About Plastic Pollution. Why Are Some Environmentalists Still Concerned?
- In Nevada’s Senate Race, Energy Policy Is a Stark Divide Between Cortez Masto and Laxalt
- 'No Good Deed': Who's the killer in the Netflix comedy? And will there be a Season 2?
- Step up Your Fashion With the Top 17 Trending Amazon Styles Right Now
- Warming Trends: How Hairdressers Are Mobilizing to Counter Climate Change, Plus Polar Bears in Greenland and the ‘Sounds of the Ocean’
- Inside Clean Energy: Here Are 5 States that Took Leaps on Clean Energy Policy in 2021
- Questlove charts 50 years of SNL musical hits (and misses)
- A Biomass Power Plant in Rural North Carolina Reignites Concerns Over Clean Energy and Environmental Justice
Ranking
- Taylor Swift Eras Archive site launches on singer's 35th birthday. What is it?
- Twitter once muzzled Russian and Chinese state propaganda. That's over now
- Elon Musk threatens to reassign @NPR on Twitter to 'another company'
- Our final thoughts on the influencer industry
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- Why Bachelor Nation's Tayshia Adams Has Become More Private Since Her Split With Zac Clark
- NBC's late night talk show staff get pay and benefits during writers strike
- Warming Trends: Chilling in a Heat Wave, Healthy Food Should Eat Healthy Too, Breeding Delays for Wild Dogs, and Three Days of Climate Change in Song
Recommendation
Tree trimmer dead after getting caught in wood chipper at Florida town hall
Two US Electrical Grid Operators Claim That New Rules For Coal Ash Could Make Electricity Supplies Less Reliable
Warming Trends: Chilling in a Heat Wave, Healthy Food Should Eat Healthy Too, Breeding Delays for Wild Dogs, and Three Days of Climate Change in Song
Space Tourism Poses a Significant ‘Risk to the Climate’
Newly elected West Virginia lawmaker arrested and accused of making terroristic threats
Tracking the impact of U.S.-China tensions on global financial institutions
Inside Clean Energy: Here’s What the 2021 Elections Tell Us About the Politics of Clean Energy
New York Is Facing a Pandemic-Fueled Home Energy Crisis, With No End in Sight