Current:Home > FinanceHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Capitatum
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
PredictIQ View
Date:2025-04-06 08:56:21
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! (991)
Related
- The FBI should have done more to collect intelligence before the Capitol riot, watchdog finds
- Family of a Black teen who was shot after ringing the wrong doorbell files lawsuit against homeowner
- Workers’ paychecks grew faster in the first quarter, a possible concern for the Fed
- Where's Wally? Emotional support alligator who gives hugs and kisses is missing in Georgia
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem stands by decision to kill dog, share it in new book
- A Plastics Plant Promised Pennsylvania Prosperity, but to Some Residents It’s Become a ‘Shockingly Bad’ Neighbor
- Jason Kelce joining ESPN's 'Monday Night Countdown' pregame coverage, per report
- Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
- Report: RB Ezekiel Elliott to rejoin Dallas Cowboys
Ranking
- McConnell absent from Senate on Thursday as he recovers from fall in Capitol
- GaxEx: Ushering in a New Era of Secure and Convenient Global Cryptocurrency Trading
- Alo Yoga's Biggest Sale of the Year Is Here at Last! Score up to 70% off Sitewide
- Skipping updates on your phone? Which apps are listening? Check out these tech tips
- As Trump Enters Office, a Ripe Oil and Gas Target Appears: An Alabama National Forest
- In unusual push, funders band together to get out grants around election work ‘early’
- Investors trying to take control of Norfolk Southern railroad pick up key support
- Funeral services are held for a Chicago police officer fatally shot while heading home from work
Recommendation
Intellectuals vs. The Internet
Kate Middleton and Prince William Celebrate 13th Wedding Anniversary With Never-Before-Seen Photo
Kristaps Porzingis could be latest NBA star to be sidelined during playoffs
Kate Middleton and Prince William Celebrate 13th Wedding Anniversary With Never-Before-Seen Photo
NHL in ASL returns, delivering American Sign Language analysis for Deaf community at Winter Classic
USA TODAY's investigative story on Mel Tucker wins Headliner Award. Tucker was later fired.
Indonesia’s Mount Ruang erupts again, spewing ash and peppering villages with debris
The Most-Shopped Celeb Recommendations This Month: Gwyneth Paltrow, Kyle Richards, and More