Current:Home > FinanceHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Mastery Money Tools
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 20:52:04
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! (76742)
Related
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- Starbucks is giving away free fall drinks every Thursday in September: How to get yours
- FDA warns consumers not to eat certain oysters from Connecticut over potential sewage contamination
- Author traces 'surprising history' of words that label women and their lives
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- 'Shame on you': UNC football coach Mack Brown rips NCAA after Tez Walker ruled ineligible
- Leah Remini Speaks Out After Dangerous Danny Masterson Is Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison
- After body slamming student during arrest, Georgia school police chief placed on leave
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- How the Phillips Curve shaped macroeconomics
Ranking
- Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow owns a $3 million Batmobile Tumbler
- St. Louis photographer run over and municipal worker arrested after village threatens to tow cars
- One Chip Challenge maker Paqui pulls product from store shelves after teen's death in Massachusetts
- Why is the current housing market so expensive? Blame the boomers, one economist says.
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- Nicki Minaj Returning to Host and Perform at 2023 MTV Video Music Awards
- Italy’s government approves crackdown on juvenile crime after a spate of rapes and youth criminality
- Lab-grown human embryo-like structures bring hope for research into early-pregnancy complications
Recommendation
Meta donates $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund
Stop Scrolling. This Elemis Deal Is Too Good to Pass Up
One Chip Challenge maker Paqui pulls product from store shelves after teen's death in Massachusetts
Texas paid bitcoin miner more than $31 million to cut energy usage during heat wave
The FBI should have done more to collect intelligence before the Capitol riot, watchdog finds
Comet Nishimura will pass Earth for first time in over 400 years: How to find and watch it
How the Phillips Curve shaped macroeconomics
2 Kentucky men exonerated in 1990s killing awarded more than $20 million