Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Prime Capital Blueprint
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-16 13:20:54
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! (4856)
Related
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- Australia's triathletes took E.coli medicine a month before 2024 Paris Olympics
- Trip to Normandy gives Olympic wrestler new perspective on what great-grandfather endured
- USWNT roster, schedule for Paris Olympics: What to know about team headed into semifinals
- Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump
- What You Need to Know About This Mercury Retrograde—and Which Signs Should Expect Some Extra Turbulence
- 3 people are found dead at a southeast Albuquerque home, police say it appears to be a homicide case
- Social media bans could deny teenagers mental health help
- Travis Hunter, the 2
- Thousands brave the heat for 70th anniversary of Newport Jazz Festival
Ranking
- Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
- Olympic gymnastics recap: Suni Lee, Kaylia Nemour, Qiu Qiyuan medal in bars final
- Àngela Aguilar, Christian Nodal are married: Revisit their relationship
- Financial markets around the globe are falling. Here’s what to know about how we got here
- US wholesale inflation accelerated in November in sign that some price pressures remain elevated
- Northrop Grumman launch to ISS for resupply mission scrubbed due to weather
- Democratic primary in Arizona’s 3rd District still close, could be headed for recount
- Michigan toddler recovering after shooting himself at babysitter’s house, police say
Recommendation
Most popular books of the week: See what topped USA TODAY's bestselling books list
Kamala Harris on Social Security: 10 things you need to know
Am I too old to open a Roth IRA? Don't count yourself out just yet
Japan’s Nikkei 225 index plunges 12.4% as world markets tremble over risks to the US economy
Global Warming Set the Stage for Los Angeles Fires
Buying Taylor Swift tickets at face value? These fans make it possible
Olympic track highlights: Noah Lyles is World's Fastest Man in 100 meters photo finish
'It's me being me': Behind the scenes with Snoop Dogg at the Paris Olympics