Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Wealth Legacy Solutions
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-14 15:15:09
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! (13843)
Related
- EU countries double down on a halt to Syrian asylum claims but will not yet send people back
- Jelly Roll says weight loss journey was inspired by wanting to have a baby with Bunnie XO
- Stanley Cup Final difference-makers: Connor McDavid, Aleksander Barkov among 10 stars to watch
- Lakers conduct a public coaching search, considering Redick and Hurley, in hopes of pleasing LeBron
- Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
- Nvidia stock split: Investors who hold shares by end of Thursday trading to be impacted
- Oklahoma softball eyes four-peat after WCWS Game 1 home run derby win over Texas
- McDonald's loses Big Mac trademark as EU court sides with Irish rival Supermac's
- Jorge Ramos reveals his final day with 'Noticiero Univision': 'It's been quite a ride'
- Free throws, free food: Chipotle to give away burritos during NBA Finals
Ranking
- 'Most Whopper
- Travis Kelce Reveals How He's Staying Grounded Amid Taylor Swift Relationship
- Today is last day Walmart shoppers can claim up to $500. Here's how.
- GOP backers of 3 initiatives sue to keep their fiscal impact off the November ballot
- Working Well: When holidays present rude customers, taking breaks and the high road preserve peace
- Brazil unveils $4 million supercow, twice as meaty as others of her breed
- Pregnant Model Iskra Lawrence Claps Back at Body-Shamers
- Tornado hits Michigan without warning, killing toddler, while twister in Maryland injures 5
Recommendation
Google unveils a quantum chip. Could it help unlock the universe's deepest secrets?
Maura Healey, America’s first lesbian governor, oversees raising of Pride flag at Statehouse
Suzanne Collins Volunteers As Tribute To Deliver Another Hunger Games Novel
World hits 12 straight months of record-high temperatures — but as warming continues, it'll be remembered as comparatively cold
Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
Solar Panel Prices Are Low Again. Here’s Who’s Winning and Losing
2 more charged in betting scandal that spurred NBA to bar Raptors’ Jontay Porter for life
Colorado: 'Hidden' elk charges, injures 4-year-old boy in second elk attack in a week