Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -TradeWisdom
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 21:11:54
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! (86554)
Related
- What do we know about the mysterious drones reported flying over New Jersey?
- Proof Austin Swift's Girlfriend Sydney Ness Is Just as Big a Football Fan as Taylor Swift
- Jury awards teen pop group OMG Girlz $71.5 million in battle with toy maker over “L.O.L.” dolls
- Georgia court could reject counting presidential votes for Cornel West and Claudia De la Cruz
- Sonya Massey's father decries possible release of former deputy charged with her death
- Boeing’s ability to end a costly strike and extra FAA scrutiny looks uncertain
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Game Changers
- When does 'Grotesquerie' premiere? Date, time, where to watch new show featuring Travis Kelce
- Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
- Election 2024 Latest: Trump makes first campaign stop in Georgia since feud with Kemp ended
Ranking
- Jamie Foxx reps say actor was hit in face by a glass at birthday dinner, needed stitches
- This AI chatbot can help you get paid family leave in 9 states. Here's how.
- T.I. and Tameka Tiny Harris Win $71 Million in Lawsuit Against Toy Company
- Two people killed, 5 injured in Texas home collapse
- Could Bill Belichick, Robert Kraft reunite? Maybe in Pro Football Hall of Fame's 2026 class
- Dangerous chemical leak spurs evacuation order in Ohio town
- Whooping cough cases are on the rise. Here's what you need to know.
- Ohio sheriff deletes online post about Harris supporters and their yard signs after upset
Recommendation
Residents worried after ceiling cracks appear following reroofing works at Jalan Tenaga HDB blocks
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Game Changers
Marley Brothers upholds father’s legacy with first tour in 2 decades
When does the new season of '9-1-1' come out? Season 8 premiere date, cast, where to watch
Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people
Francis Ford Coppola’s ‘Megalopolis’ is one from the heart
Aramark workers at 3 Philadelphia sports stadiums are now on strike. Here's why.
New Hampshire woman to plead guilty in the death of her 5-year-old son