Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -BeyondProfit Compass
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-19 00:50:34
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! (9)
Related
- California DMV apologizes for license plate that some say mocks Oct. 7 attack on Israel
- Biden signs foreign aid bill into law, clearing the way for new weapons package for Ukraine
- Judge declines to dismiss lawsuits filed against rapper Travis Scott over deadly Astroworld concert
- Missouri House backs legal shield for weedkiller maker facing thousands of cancer-related lawsuits
- The Louvre will be renovated and the 'Mona Lisa' will have her own room
- Oklahoma prosecutors charge fifth member of anti-government group in Kansas women’s killings
- Key moments in the Supreme Court’s latest abortion case that could change how women get care
- Charlie Woods attempting to qualify for 2024 US Open at Florida event
- Romantasy reigns on spicy BookTok: Recommendations from the internet’s favorite genre
- Oklahoma prosecutors charge fifth member of anti-government group in Kansas women’s killings
Ranking
- Rolling Loud 2024: Lineup, how to stream the world's largest hip hop music festival
- Angel Reese, Kamilla Cardoso give Chicago, WNBA huge opportunity. Sky owners must step up.
- Senators demand accounting of rapid closure plan for California prison where women were abused
- After 24 years, deathbed confession leads to bodies of missing girl, mother in West Virginia
- B.A. Parker is learning the banjo
- Bear cub pulled from tree for selfie 'doing very well,' no charges filed in case
- Relatives of those who died waiting for livers at now halted Houston transplant program seek answers
- The Essentials: Mindy Kaling spills on running to Beyoncé, her favorite Sharpie and success
Recommendation
Spooky or not? Some Choa Chu Kang residents say community garden resembles cemetery
2 women killed by Elias Huizar were his ex-wife and 17-year-old he had baby with: Police
After 24 years, deathbed confession leads to bodies of missing girl, mother in West Virginia
Beyoncé surprises 2-year-old fan with sweet gift after viral TikTok: 'I see your halo, Tyler'
Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
When does 'Bridgerton' Season 3 return? Premiere date, cast, trailer for Netflix romance
Jill Duggar Shares Emotional Message Following Memorial for Stillborn Baby Girl
TikTok has promised to sue over the potential US ban. What’s the legal outlook?