Current:Home > MarketsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Thrive Success Strategies
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
EchoSense Quantitative Think Tank Center View
Date:2025-04-11 05:12:24
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! (4)
Related
- Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
- US, China compete to study water on the moon: Why that matters for future missions
- No drinking and only Christian music during Sunday Gospel Hour at Nashville’s most iconic honky tonk
- Carly Pearce berates concertgoer after alleged confrontation: 'Get out of my show'
- Meet first time Grammy nominee Charley Crockett
- Software upgrades for Hyundai, Kia help cut theft rates, new HLDI research finds
- How Blake Lively Honored Queen Britney Spears During Red Carpet Date Night With Ryan Reynolds
- Judge rejects bid by Judicial Watch, Daily Caller to reopen fight over access to Biden Senate papers
- Working Well: When holidays present rude customers, taking breaks and the high road preserve peace
- Microsoft hits back at Delta after the airline said last month’s tech outage cost it $500 million
Ranking
- Finally, good retirement news! Southwest pilots' plan is a bright spot, experts say
- No drinking and only Christian music during Sunday Gospel Hour at Nashville’s most iconic honky tonk
- Serena Williams, a Paris restaurant and the danger of online reviews in 2024
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Road Trip
- The Louvre will be renovated and the 'Mona Lisa' will have her own room
- PHOTO COLLECTION: AP Top Photos of the Day Tuesday August 6, 2024
- As stock markets plummet, ask yourself: Do you really want Harris running the economy?
- Stocks bounced back Tuesday, a day after a global plunge
Recommendation
Appeals court scraps Nasdaq boardroom diversity rules in latest DEI setback
Can chief heat officers protect the US from extreme heat?
Powerball winning numbers for August 5 drawing: jackpot rises to $185 million
Powerball winning numbers for August 5 drawing: jackpot rises to $185 million
'Squid Game' without subtitles? Duolingo, Netflix encourage fans to learn Korean
2024 Olympics: Michael Phelps Pretty Disappointed in Team USA Men's Swimming Results
Ancient 'hobbits' were even smaller than previously thought, scientists say
Officials begin to assess damage following glacial dam outburst flooding in Alaska’s capital city