Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Pinnacle Profit Strategies
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-13 08:27:53
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! (51)
Related
- Nevada attorney general revives 2020 fake electors case
- ‘Dancing With the Stars’ pro Artem Chigvintsev arrested on domestic violence charge in California
- NHL player Johnny Gaudreau and his brother have died after their bicycles were hit by a car
- These Target Labor Day Deals Won’t Disappoint—Save up to 70% off Decor & Shop Apple, Keurig, Cuisinart
- Retirement planning: 3 crucial moves everyone should make before 2025
- Ex-election workers want Rudy Giuliani’s apartment, Yankees rings in push to collect $148M judgment
- Lea Michele Gives First Look at Baby Daughter Emery
- 2 women charged in Lululemon shoplifting scheme in Minneapolis
- The Super Bowl could end in a 'three
- Michigan Supreme Court rules out refunds for college students upended by COVID-19 rules
Ranking
- Jamie Foxx gets stitches after a glass is thrown at him during dinner in Beverly Hills
- Navajo Nation adopts changes to tribal law regulating the transportation of uranium across its land
- Katy Perry Teases Orlando Bloom and Daughter Daisy Have Become Her “Focus Group”
- US Open highlights: Frances Tiafoe outlasts Ben Shelton in all-American epic
- Costco membership growth 'robust,' even amid fee increase: What to know about earnings release
- 7 US troops hurt in raid with Iraqi forces targeting Islamic State group militants that killed 15
- Top Deals from Coach Outlet Labor Day Sale 2024: $24 Wallets, $78 Bags & Up to 76% Off Bestselling Styles
- Dancing With the Stars Alum Cheryl Burke Addresses Artem Chigvintsev’s Arrest
Recommendation
Trump wants to turn the clock on daylight saving time
One of Matthew Perry's Doctors Agrees to Plea Deal in Ketamine-Related Death Case
First look at 'Jurassic World Rebirth': See new cast Scarlett Johansson, Jonathan Bailey
Are 'provider women' the opposite of 'trad wives'? They're getting attention on TikTok.
Don't let hackers fool you with a 'scam
Contract security officers leave jail in Atlanta after nonpayment of contract
Toyota recalls 43,000 Sequoia hybrids for risk involving tow hitch covers
Dancing With the Stars Alum Cheryl Burke Addresses Artem Chigvintsev’s Arrest