Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Stellar Wealth Sphere
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-17 13:08:04
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! (71)
Related
- Trump wants to turn the clock on daylight saving time
- New Godzilla show 'Monarch: Legacy of Monsters' poses the question: Menace or protector?
- Moms for Liberty reports more than $2 million in revenue in 2022
- Emma Chamberlain Details New Chapter After Breakup From Role Model
- From family road trips to travel woes: Americans are navigating skyrocketing holiday costs
- High-speed and regional trains involved in an accident in southern Germany, injuring several people
- Sarah Yarborough's killer had been in prison for attacking another woman, but was released early
- Prices fall, unemployment rises and Boomers have all the houses
- Gen. Mark Milley's security detail and security clearance revoked, Pentagon says
- California fugitive sentenced for killing Florida woman in 1984
Ranking
- John Galliano out at Maison Margiela, capping year of fashion designer musical chairs
- President Biden signs short-term funding bill to keep the government open ahead of deadline
- Man accused of kidnapping a 9-year-old girl from New York park is charged with rape
- Dolly Parton dug deep to become a 'Rockstar': 'I'm going to bust a gut and do it'
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- What's ahead for travelers during Thanksgiving 2023
- Is a Barbie Sequel In the Works? Margot Robbie Says…
- Why is there lead in some applesauce? FDA now screening cinnamon imports, as authorities brace for reports to climb
Recommendation
Arkansas State Police probe death of woman found after officer
The story behind the Osama bin Laden videos on TikTok
Rio’s iconic Christ statue welcomes Taylor Swift with open arms thanks to Swifties and a priest
Sofía Vergara Reflects on Very Difficult Year After Joe Manganiello Breakup
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Triathlon
From wild mustangs to reimagined housing, check out these can't-miss podcasts
Why Sharon Osbourne Cautions Against Ozempic Use After Dropping to Under 100 Lbs.
Years after strike, West Virginia public workers push back against another insurance cost increase