Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Wealth Momentum Network
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-18 06:45:05
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! (522)
Related
- Are Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp down? Meta says most issues resolved after outages
- Nipah: Using sticks to find a fatal virus with pandemic potential
- Coach Just Restocked Its Ultra-Cool, Upcycled Coachtopia Collection
- Why Trump didn't get a mugshot — and wasn't even technically arrested — at his arraignment
- Juan Soto praise of Mets' future a tough sight for Yankees, but World Series goal remains
- Analysis: India Takes Unique Path to Lower Carbon Emissions
- UV nail dryers may pose cancer risks, a study says. Here are precautions you can take
- The FDA proposes new targets to limit lead in baby food
- Skins Game to make return to Thanksgiving week with a modern look
- When is it OK to make germs worse in a lab? It's a more relevant question than ever
Ranking
- Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
- High school senior found dead in New Jersey lake after scavenger hunt that went astray
- What is the Hatch Act — and what count as a violation?
- Woman, 28, arrested for posing as 17-year-old student at Louisiana high school
- Elon Musk's skyrocketing net worth: He's the first person with over $400 billion
- Trump delivered defiant speech after indictment hearing. Here's what he said.
- Farm Bureau Warily Concedes on Climate, But Members Praise Trump’s Deregulation
- Some Muslim Americans Turn To Faith For Guidance On Abortion
Recommendation
Trump invites nearly all federal workers to quit now, get paid through September
Philadelphia woman killed by debris while driving on I-95 day after highway collapse
U.S. Army soldier Cole Bridges pleads guilty to attempting to help ISIS murder U.S. troops
Philadelphia woman killed by debris while driving on I-95 day after highway collapse
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Hi Hi!
Why inventing a vaccine for AIDS is tougher than for COVID
A single-shot treatment to protect infants from RSV may be coming soon
E. Jean Carroll can seek more damages against Trump, judge says