Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -DollarDynamic
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-19 14:12:22
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! (1)
Related
- Federal court filings allege official committed perjury in lawsuit tied to Louisiana grain terminal
- Former Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Raymond Chan convicted in sprawling bribery case
- Last Minute Shopping For Prom Dresses? Check Out These Sites With Fast Shipping
- Completion of audit into Arkansas governor’s $19,000 lectern has been pushed back to April
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- Man charged with murder after pushing man in front of NYC subway in 'unprovoked attack': NYPD
- The story behind the luxury handbag Taylor Swift took to lunch with Travis Kelce
- House of Villains Season 2 Cast Revealed: Teresa Giudice, Richard Hatch and More
- From family road trips to travel woes: Americans are navigating skyrocketing holiday costs
- When is the 2024 total solar eclipse? Your guide to glasses, forecast, where to watch.
Ranking
- DoorDash steps up driver ID checks after traffic safety complaints
- Suspect in 3 Pennsylvania killings makes initial court appearance on related New Jersey charges
- Egg prices are hopping again this Easter. Is dyeing eggs worth the cost?
- Princess Kate's cancer diagnosis highlights balancing act between celebrity and royals' private lives
- Spooky or not? Some Choa Chu Kang residents say community garden resembles cemetery
- Ex-Trump lawyer Eastman should lose state law license for efforts to overturn election, judge says
- Last Minute Shopping For Prom Dresses? Check Out These Sites With Fast Shipping
- A man has been arrested for randomly assaulting a young woman on a New York City street
Recommendation
The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding
Ruby Franke’s Estranged Husband Kevin Details How She Became Involved in Extreme Religious Cult
Former correctional officer at women’s prison in California sentenced for sexually abusing inmates
Pennsylvania House advances measure to prohibit ‘ghost guns’
Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
Ex-Trump lawyer Eastman should lose state law license for efforts to overturn election, judge says
Media attorney warns advancing bill would create ‘giant loophole’ in Kentucky’s open records law
Missouri boarding school closes as state agency examines how it responded to abuse claims