Current:Home > ScamsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -MoneyMentor
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-12 06:48:37
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! (8614)
Related
- Stamford Road collision sends motorcyclist flying; driver arrested
- Does 'Feud: Capote Vs. The Swans' ruffle enough feathers
- Usher reveals he once proposed to Chilli of TLC, says breakup 'broke my heart'
- Kansas City mass shooting is the 50th so far this year, gun violence awareness group says
- Average rate on 30
- New York redistricting panel approves new congressional map with modest changes
- Texas man killed in gunfight with police at central Michigan café
- Verdict in Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial expected Friday, capping busy week of court action
- Don't let hackers fool you with a 'scam
- Driver who injured 9 in a California sidewalk crash guilty of hit-and-run but not DUI
Ranking
- Jamie Foxx reps say actor was hit in face by a glass at birthday dinner, needed stitches
- Who is Lynette Woodard? Former Kansas star back in spotlight as Caitlin Clark nears record
- Kylian Mbappe has told PSG he will leave at the end of the season, AP sources say
- Alaska woman gets 99 years for orchestrating catfished murder-for-hire plot in friend’s death
- NHL in ASL returns, delivering American Sign Language analysis for Deaf community at Winter Classic
- Four-term New Hampshire governor delivers his final state-of-the-state speech
- Power Rangers’ Jason Faunt Reveals Surprising Meaning Behind Baby Girl’s Name
- 'I can't move': Pack of dogs bites 11-year-old boy around 60 times during attack in SC: Reports
Recommendation
The Daily Money: Spending more on holiday travel?
Outer Banks Star Austin North Speaks Out After Arrest Over Alleged Hospital Attack
The Best Luxury Bed Sheets That Are So Soft and Irresistible, You’ll Struggle to Get Out of Bed
Man charged with setting fires at predominantly Black church in Rhode Island
Person accused of accosting Rep. Nancy Mace at Capitol pleads not guilty to assault charge
Top takeaways from Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis' forceful testimony in contentious hearing on whether she should be removed from Trump Georgia 2020 election case
Angelia Jolie’s Ex-Husband Jonny Lee Miller Says He Once Jumped Out of a Plane to Impress Her
Eyes on the road: Automated speed cameras get a fresh look as traffic deaths mount