Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases-DB Wealth Institute B2 Expert Reviews
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View Date:2025-01-11 10:41:01
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! (15)
Related
- Today's Craig Melvin Replacing Hoda Kotb: Everything to Know About the Beloved Anchor
- U.S. Energy Outlook: Sunny on the Trade Front, Murkier for the Climate
- 'Anti-dopamine parenting' can curb a kid's craving for screens or sweets
- Keep Up With Khloé Kardashian's Style and Shop 70% Off Good American Deals This Memorial Day Weekend
- Justice Department sues to block UnitedHealth Group’s $3.3 billion purchase of Amedisys
- In Texas, a rare program offers hope for some of the most vulnerable women and babies
- American Climate: In Iowa, After the Missouri River Flooded, a Paradise Lost
- Shop the Best lululemon Deals During Memorial Day Weekend: $39 Sports Bras, $29 Tops & More on Sale
- Why Cynthia Erivo Needed Prosthetic Ears for Wicked
- Florida Ballot Measure Could Halt Rooftop Solar, but Do Voters Know That?
Ranking
- 4 charged in Detroit street shooting that left 2 dead, 5 wounded
- The world's worst industrial disaster harmed people even before they were born
- Garland denies whistleblower claim that Justice Department interfered in Hunter Biden probe
- Lewis Capaldi's Tourette's interrupted his performance. The crowd helped him finish
- West Virginia expands education savings account program for military families
- Canada Sets Methane Reduction Targets for Oil and Gas, but Alberta Has Its Own Plans
- Be a Part of Halle Bailey and Boyfriend DDG's World With This PDA Video
- Two New Studies Add Fuel to the Debate Over Methane
Recommendation
-
Will Trump’s hush money conviction stand? A judge will rule on the president-elect’s immunity claim
-
Having an out-of-body experience? Blame this sausage-shaped piece of your brain
-
Here's What You Missed Since Glee: Inside the Cast's Real Love Lives
-
Elon Musk Eyes a Clean-Energy Empire
-
Arizona Supreme Court declines emergency request to extend ballot ‘curing’ deadline
-
What were the mysterious banging noises heard during the search for the missing Titanic sub?
-
Honolulu Sues Petroleum Companies For Climate Change Damages to City
-
In Dozens of Cities East of the Mississippi, Winter Never Really Happened