Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -CapitalCourse
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-11 18:06:17
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! (186)
Related
- Newly elected West Virginia lawmaker arrested and accused of making terroristic threats
- Earthquakes raise alert for Hawaii’s Kilauea volcano. But any eruption is unlikely to threaten homes
- New Mexico police won’t be charged in fatal shooting of a homeowner after going to the wrong house
- A Boutique Hotel Helps Explain the Benefits of Businesses and Government Teaming Up to Conserve Energy
- Finally, good retirement news! Southwest pilots' plan is a bright spot, experts say
- Justin Timberlake Wants to Apologize to “Absolutely F--king Nobody” Amid Britney Spears Backlash
- Parents arrested in case of social media model charged with killing boyfriend
- Australian TV news channel sparks outrage for editing photo of lawmaker who said her body and outfit were photoshopped
- 'Survivor' 47 finale, part one recap: 2 players were sent home. Who's left in the game?
- Justin Timberlake Wants to Apologize to “Absolutely F--king Nobody” Amid Britney Spears Backlash
Ranking
- Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
- Inside Stormi Webster's Wildly Extravagant World
- Kelce brothers shoutout Taylor Swift for reaching Super Bowl in 'her rookie year'
- Georgia district attorney prosecuting Trump has been subpoenaed over claims of improper relationship
- Biden administration makes final diplomatic push for stability across a turbulent Mideast
- First of back-to-back atmospheric rivers drenches Northern California while moving south
- New Mexico will not charge police officers who fatally shot man at wrong address
- Premature birth rate rose 12% since 2014, the CDC reports. A doctor shares what to know.
Recommendation
Where will Elmo go? HBO moves away from 'Sesame Street'
Nevada attorney general launches go-it-alone lawsuits against social media firms in state court
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologizes to parents of victims of online exploitation in heated Senate hearing
Chrissy Teigen accidentally slips that she's had her breasts done 3 times
How to watch new prequel series 'Dexter: Original Sin': Premiere date, cast, streaming
6 books to help young readers learn about Black history
Hulu is about to crack down on password sharing. Here's what you need to know.
AP-NORC poll finds an uptick in positive ratings of the US economy, but it’s not boosting Biden