Current:Home > MyHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Global Finance Compass
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
Algosensey View
Date:2025-04-08 12:54:39
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! (45222)
Related
- South Korean president's party divided over defiant martial law speech
- Taylor Swift Reveals Release Date for Speak Now (Taylor's Version) at The Eras Tour
- House Oversight chairman to move ahead with contempt of Congress proceedings against FBI director
- Miss Universe Australia Finalist Sienna Weir Dead at 23 After Horse-Riding Accident
- FACT FOCUS: Inspector general’s Jan. 6 report misrepresented as proof of FBI setup
- Missouri man Michael Tisius executed despite appeals from former jurors
- Missouri man Michael Tisius executed despite appeals from former jurors
- The clock is ticking for U.N. goals to end poverty — and it doesn't look promising
- Israel lets Palestinians go back to northern Gaza for first time in over a year as cease
- Cuba Gooding Jr. settles lawsuit over New York City rape accusation before trial, court records say
Ranking
- The Louvre will be renovated and the 'Mona Lisa' will have her own room
- The heartbreak and cost of losing a baby in America
- Real Housewives Star Lisa Barlow’s Mother's Day Amazon Picks Will Make Mom Feel Baby Gorgeous
- Can therapy solve racism?
- Global Warming Set the Stage for Los Angeles Fires
- HIV crashed her life. She found her way back to joy — and spoke at the U.N. this week
- How Kate Middleton Honored Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana at Coronation
- High rents outpace federal disability payments, leaving many homeless
Recommendation
San Francisco names street for Associated Press photographer who captured the iconic Iwo Jima photo
Today’s Climate: June 8, 2010
2015: The Year the Environmental Movement Knocked Out Keystone XL
Company Behind Methane Leak Is Ordered to Offset the Climate Damage
Meta releases AI model to enhance Metaverse experience
TransCanada Launches Two Legal Challenges to Obama’s Rejection of Keystone
Recalled Boppy baby lounger now linked to at least 10 infant deaths
New York state trooper charged in deadly shooting captured on bodycam video after high-speed chase