Current:Home > ContactHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -LegacyBuild Academy
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-16 18:46:04
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! (88)
Related
- What to watch: O Jolie night
- 'Unimaginably painful': Ballerina Michaela DePrince, who died 1 day before mom, remembered
- Former office manager of Dartmouth College student paper gets 15-month sentence for stealing $223K
- Natasha Rothwell knows this one necessity is 'bizarre': 'It's a bit of an oral fixation'
- Tarte Shape Tape Concealer Sells Once Every 4 Seconds: Get 50% Off Before It's Gone
- Olympic Gymnast Jordan Chiles Files Appeal Over Bronze Medal Ruling
- Georgia official seeks more school safety money after Apalachee High shooting
- 'He didn't blink': Kirk Cousins defies doubters to lead Falcons' wild comeback win vs. Eagles
- Arkansas State Police probe death of woman found after officer
- Delaware judge sets parameters for trial in Smartmatic defamation lawsuit against Newsmax
Ranking
- Tarte Shape Tape Concealer Sells Once Every 4 Seconds: Get 50% Off Before It's Gone
- Donald Trump to attend Alabama vs. Georgia college football game in late September
- Former office manager of Dartmouth College student paper gets 15-month sentence for stealing $223K
- Footage for Simone Biles' Netflix doc could be smoking gun in Jordan Chiles' medal appeal
- Jamie Foxx gets stitches after a glass is thrown at him during dinner in Beverly Hills
- Why Suede Bags Are Fashion’s Must-Have Accessory This Fall
- Legally Blonde’s Ali Larter Shares Why She and Her Family Moved Away From Hollywood
- Bill Belichick looking back on Super Bowl victories highlight 'ManningCast' during MNF
Recommendation
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Triathlon
Wisconsin QB Tyler Van Dyke to miss rest of season with knee injury, per reports
Why Kelly Osbourne Says Rehab Is Like Learning “How to Be a Better Drug Addict”
Tennessee is adding a 10% fee on football game tickets next season to pay players
A White House order claims to end 'censorship.' What does that mean?
23andMe agrees to $30 million settlement over data breach that affected 6.9 million users
Q&A: Near Lake Superior, a Tribe Fights to Remove a Pipeline From the Wetlands It Depends On
Oregon man charged with stalking, harassing UConn's Paige Bueckers