Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -CryptoBase
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-15 04:30:02
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! (1)
Related
- SFO's new sensory room helps neurodivergent travelers fight flying jitters
- Nvidia sees stock prices drop after record Q2 earnings. Here's why.
- The Daily Money: Gas prices ease
- Michigan's Sherrone Moore among college football coaches without a signed contract
- Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
- Jewish students at Columbia faced hostile environment during pro-Palestinian protests, report finds
- Everything to Know About Dancing With the Stars Pro Artem Chigvintsev’s Domestic Violence Arrest
- Poland eases abortion access with new guidelines for doctors under a restrictive law
- North Carolina justices rule for restaurants in COVID
- Richard Simmons' final days: Fitness guru deferred medical care to spend birthday at home
Ranking
- Why Sean "Diddy" Combs Is Being Given a Laptop in Jail Amid Witness Intimidation Fears
- These Target Labor Day Deals Won’t Disappoint—Save up to 70% off Decor & Shop Apple, Keurig, Cuisinart
- Police detain man Scotty McCreery accused of hitting woman at his Colorado concert
- Nvidia sees stock prices drop after record Q2 earnings. Here's why.
- As Trump Enters Office, a Ripe Oil and Gas Target Appears: An Alabama National Forest
- A fifth of Red Lobsters are gone. Here's every US location that's still open
- Tallulah Willis Shares Insight Into Her Mental Health Journey Amid New Venture
- Sister Wives' Robyn and Kody Brown List $1.65 Million Home for Sale
Recommendation
SFO's new sensory room helps neurodivergent travelers fight flying jitters
Tallulah Willis Shares Insight Into Her Mental Health Journey Amid New Venture
New Hampshire’s highest court upholds policy supporting transgender students’ privacy
Leah Remini announces split from husband Angelo Pagán after 21 years
The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding
Women behind bars are often survivors of abuse. A series of new laws aim to reduce their sentences
Sheriff’s office quickly dispels active shooter rumor at Disney World after fight, ‘popping’ sound
Milo Ventimiglia reunites with Mandy Moore for 'This Is Us' rewatch: See the photo