Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN)
In brief
The Court overturned the appeals court’s ruling, concluding that judges could not set aside Michigan voters’ decision on race-based preferences in admissions.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 6-2 · April 22, 2014 · Opinion by Justice Kennedy
- What it’s about
- <p> Justice KENNEDY announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which THE CHIEF JUSTICE and Justice ALITO join. </p>
- Who it affects
- The Sixth Circuit’s ruling against the amendment was overturned, leaving Michigan’s restriction on race-based preferences in public university admissions in place.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The amendment also barred public institutions from discrimination or preferential treatment based on sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, education, and contracting.
Question presented
Does an amendment to a state's constitution to prohibit race-and sex-based discrimination and preferential treatment in public university admission decisions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
What the Court decided
Holding
The judgment is reversed. 701 F. 3d 466, reversed. JUSTICE KENNEDY, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE ALITO, concluded that there is no authority in the Federal Constitution or in this Court’s precedents for the Judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit to the voters the determination whether racial preferences may be considered in governmental decisions, in particular with respect to school admissions.
- Result
- Reversed
The Court's reasoning
Justice Kennedy, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, said neither the Constitution nor earlier Supreme Court rulings authorized courts to strike down Michigan laws that leave voters to decide whether government may consider racial preferences, especially in admissions.
The vote
- Joined the judgment
- Concurred in a separate opinion
- Dissented
- Wrote an opinion
- Concurring · 3agreed with the result, wrote separately
- Breyerwrote separately
- Thomas
- Scaliawrote separately
- Dissenting · 2disagreed with the result
- Ginsburg
- Sotomayorwrote the dissent
From the opinions
“But without checks, democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups.”
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished the case; no further Supreme Court step is listed.
Documents
Opinions
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Opinion added: Schuette
More questions
- What did Justice Breyer say the Court did not decide?
- He said the case did not address whether the amendment could bar admissions programs designed to remedy past racial discrimination or its direct effects.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.