Current:Home > InvestHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Infinite Edge Capital
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 10:14:25
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! (35813)
Related
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- Fact checking 'A Million Miles Away': How many times did NASA reject José M. Hernández?
- NASCAR playoffs: Where the Cup Series drivers stand entering the second round
- Lee makes landfall with near-hurricane strength in Canada after moving up Atlantic Ocean
- DeepSeek: Did a little known Chinese startup cause a 'Sputnik moment' for AI?
- Special counsel asks judge to limit Trump's inflammatory statements targeting individuals, institutions in 2020 election case
- A Fracker in Pennsylvania Wants to Take 1.5 Million Gallons a Day From a Small, Biodiverse Creek. Should the State Approve a Permit?
- Tens of thousands march to kick off climate summit, demanding end to warming-causing fossil fuels
- Why we love Bear Pond Books, a ski town bookstore with a French bulldog 'Staff Pup'
- Yoga in a basement helps people in a Ukrainian front-line city cope with Russia’s constant shelling
Ranking
- Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
- Halle Berry Says Drake Used Slime Photo Without Her Permission
- Hugh Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness announce their separation after 27 years of marriage
- Hugh Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness announce their separation after 27 years of marriage
- California DMV apologizes for license plate that some say mocks Oct. 7 attack on Israel
- Eno Ichikawa, Japanese Kabuki theater actor and innovator, dies at 83
- Armed man accused of impersonating officer detained at Kennedy campaign event in LA
- Zibby’s Bookshop in Santa Monica, California organizes books by emotion rather than genre
Recommendation
Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
Poison ivy is poised to be one of the big winners of a warming world
Rural hospitals are closing maternity wards. People are seeking options to give birth closer to home
AP Top 25: No. 13 Alabama is out of the top 10 for the first time since 2015. Georgia remains No. 1
How to watch the 'Blue Bloods' Season 14 finale: Final episode premiere date, cast
EU pledges crackdown on ‘brutal’ migrant smuggling during visit to overwhelmed Italian island
Ashton Kutcher resigns from anti-child trafficking nonprofit over Danny Masterson character letter
A Mississippi jury rules officers justified in fatal 2017 shooting after police went to wrong house