Current:Home > FinanceHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Keystone Growth Academy
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-18 13:42:01
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! (733)
Related
- In ‘Nickel Boys,’ striving for a new way to see
- Abortion-rights advocates set to turn in around 800,000 signatures for Arizona ballot measure
- Patients on these antidepressants were more likely to gain weight, study says
- Palestinians ordered to flee Khan Younis, signaling likely new Israeli assault on southern Gaza city
- Taylor Swift Eras Archive site launches on singer's 35th birthday. What is it?
- High school journalism removed from Opportunity Scholarship
- Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese headline WNBA All-Star team that will face US Olympic squad
- An Ohio apartment building, evacuated after a deadly explosion nearby, could reopen soon
- Krispy Kreme offers a free dozen Grinch green doughnuts: When to get the deal
- High court passes on case of Georgia man on death row who says Black jurors were wrongly purged
Ranking
- 'Squid Game' without subtitles? Duolingo, Netflix encourage fans to learn Korean
- Indianapolis officers fire at armed man, say it’s unclear if he was wounded by officers or shot self
- Study shows how carpenter ants save the lives of some injured comrades
- Indian officials order investigation into deadly stampede, search for religious leader as death toll hits 121
- Sarah J. Maas books explained: How to read 'ACOTAR,' 'Throne of Glass' in order.
- The timeless fashion style of Carolyn Bessette Kennedy
- Northern California wildfire spreads, with more hot weather expected. Thousands evacuate
- Flying objects and shrunken heads: World UFO Day feted amid surge in sightings, government denials
Recommendation
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Hi Hi!
Abortion-rights advocates set to turn in around 800,000 signatures for Arizona ballot measure
Yes, petroleum jelly has many proven benefits. Here's what it's for.
NHL free agency winners, losers: Predators beef up, contenders lose players
Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
Bronny James says he can handle ‘amplified’ pressure of playing for Lakers with his famous father
Worsening floods and deterioration pose threats to US dam safety
Authorities, churches identify 6 family members killed in Wisconsin house fire