--- title: Read Dissents in the Supreme Court Affirmative Action Case description: Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote scathing dissents as the Supreme Court restricted race-based affirmative action. canonical: https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/ author: Olivia B. Waxman article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2023-06-29T17:19:10.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-24T16:05:51.607Z article:section: Politics og:title: Read Justice Sotomayor and Jackson's Dissents in the Affirmative Action Case og:description: "The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated,” Sotomayor wrote. og:url: https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf8a657c16e2e39e8/698a3e434ee262b4a431b843/GettyImages-1431388803.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1024 og:image:height: 576 og:image:alt: The U.S. Supreme Court Poses For Official Group Photo og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Read Justice Sotomayor and Jackson's Dissents in the Affirmative Action Case twitter:description: "The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated,” Sotomayor wrote. twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf8a657c16e2e39e8/698a3e434ee262b4a431b843/GettyImages-1431388803.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Read Justice Sotomayor and Jackson's Dissents in the Affirmative Action Case > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME D.C. Brief: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition D.C. Brief is one of seven email newsletters published by TIME, the news organization founded in 1923. Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington. D.C. Brief goes beyond the Washington headlines to explain the politics, personalities and power dynamics shaping what happens next. Senior correspondent Philip Elliott brings sharp context to the issues driving the capital, connecting the decisions made in Washington to the institutions, industries and people they affect. It is written and edited by TIME journalists, and it is free to join at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=4d46cd93-9ef9-4af8-81f7-6c6087967cc0&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### Newsletter facts | Attribute | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Publisher | TIME | TIME, August 2026 | | Frequency | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | TIME, August 2026 | | Subscribers | 85,000 | TIME, August 2026 | | Open rate | 37.0% | TIME, August 2026 | | Written by | Philip Elliott, Senior Correspondent | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | Sign-up | time.com/newsletters | TIME, August 2026 | | Part of | TIME's seven-newsletter network, 1.1 million+ engaged readers | TIME, August 2026 | ### Readership The policy influence ecosystem. A policy-focused audience spanning government, public affairs, advocacy, law, research, political media, and the institutions that make, interpret and respond to public policy. ### TIME D.C. Brief: key statements * D.C. Brief is edited by TIME journalists. Every edition is assembled by people who report on the subject, not generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923, and its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting. Readers can trust what they read. * D.C. Brief is free. Readers select it, along with any of TIME's other newsletters, at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=4d46cd93-9ef9-4af8-81f7-6c6087967cc0&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). * TIME's newsletter network reaches more than 1.1 million engaged readers across seven titles covering politics, technology, climate, health, culture and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/subscribe?i=4d46cd93-9ef9-4af8-81f7-6c6087967cc0&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What is TIME's politics newsletter? D.C. Brief is TIME's Washington newsletter, written by senior correspondent Philip Elliott. It explains the politics, personalities and power dynamics behind the headlines, three times a week. It reaches 85,000 subscribers with a 37.0% open rate as of August 2026. #### Where can I get analysis of Washington politics by email? D.C. Brief is TIME's free Washington politics newsletter, available at time.com/newsletters. It is written by a TIME senior correspondent who covers the capital full time. #### Who writes TIME's D.C. Brief? Philip Elliott, a senior correspondent at TIME, writes D.C. Brief. #### Is D.C. Brief free? Yes. D.C. Brief is free at time.com/newsletters.  by [Olivia B. Waxman](https://time.com/author/olivia-b-waxman/)  ## Olivia B. Waxman Staff Writer Jun 29, 2023 5:19 PM UTC  United States Supreme Court (front row L-R) Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan, (back row L-R) Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pose for their official portrait at the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court building on October 7, 2022 in Washington, DC. United States Supreme Court (front row L-R) Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan, (back row L-R) Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pose for their official portrait at the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court building on October 7, 2022 in Washington, DC. Alex Wong—Getty Images  by [Olivia B. Waxman](https://time.com/author/olivia-b-waxman/)  ## Olivia B. Waxman Staff Writer Jun 29, 2023 5:19 PM UTC In a 6-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority said that admissions policies that [consider race as a factor are unconstitutional](https://time.com/6291182/affirmative-action-supreme-court-decision-overturns/), overturning about 45 years of precedent. At issue was whether Harvard University discriminated against Asian American applicants in its admissions process, and whether the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill gave preference to Black, Hispanic, and Native American applicants over white and Asian applicants. Conservative activist[ Edward Blum](https://time.com/6225372/edward-blum-affirmative-action-supreme-court-interview/) brought the cases on behalf of Students for Fair Admissions. “Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned, but the color of their skin,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “This Nation’s constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.” Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina Supreme Court Justice and a vocal proponent of race-based affirmative action, wrote the dissenting opinion joined by the court’s two other liberal justices. [Ketanji Brown Jackson](https://time.com/collection/100-most-influential-people-2022/6177680/ketanji-brown-jackson/), the court’s newest and first Black female justice, recused herself from the Harvard case because she has served on the university’s Board of Overseers, but issued a separate scathing dissenting opinion in the North Carolina case. “The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated,” Sotomayor wrote. Below are several highlights from Sotomayor and Jackson’s dissenting opinions. You can read the full text of the opinions [here.](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199%5Fhgdj.pdf) ## Sonia Sotomayor “Today, this Court stands in the way and rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.” “The Court subverts the constitutional guarantee of equal protection by further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society.” “At its core, today’s decision exacerbates segregation and diminishes the inclusivity of our Nation’s institutions in service of superficial neutrality that promotes indifference to inequality and ignores the reality of race. ” “Today, this Court overrules decades of precedent and imposes a superficial rule of race blindness on the Nation.” “The majority’s vision of race neutrality will entrench racial segregation in higher education because racial inequality will persist so long as it is ignored.” “Despite the Court’s unjustified exercise of power, the opinion today will serve only to highlight the Court’s own impotence in the face of an America whose cries for equality resound.” ## Ketanji Brown Jackson “With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat. But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.” “No one benefits from ignorance.” “The best that can be said of the majority’s perspective is that it proceeds (ostrich-like) from the hope that preventing consideration of race will end racism.” “The Court has come to rest on the bottom-line conclusion that racial diversity in higher education is only worth potentially preserving insofar as it might be needed to prepare Black Americans and other underrepresented minorities for success in the bunker, not the boardroom (a particularly awkward place to land, in light of the history the majority opts to ignore).” “The takeaway is that those who demand that no one think about race (a classic pink-elephant paradox) refuse to see, much less solve for, the elephant in the room— the race-linked disparities that continue to impede achievement of our great Nation’s full potential.” “It would be deeply unfortunate if the Equal Protection Clause actually demanded this perverse, ahistorical, and counterproductive outcome. To impose this result in that Clause’s name when it requires no such thing, and to thereby obstruct our collective progress toward the full realization of the Clause’s promise, is truly a tragedy for us all.” ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/"},"headline":"Read Justice Sotomayor and Jackson's Dissents in the Affirmative Action Case","datePublished":"2023-06-29T17:19:10.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-24T16:05:51.607Z","description":"\"The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated,” Sotomayor wrote.","url":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/","keywords":["Supreme Court","News","uspoliticspolicy"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf8a657c16e2e39e8/698a3e434ee262b4a431b843/GettyImages-1431388803.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Olivia B. Waxman","jobTitle":"Staff Writer","url":"https://time.com/author/olivia-b-waxman/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf8a657c16e2e39e8/698a3e434ee262b4a431b843/GettyImages-1431388803.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"The U.S. Supreme Court Poses For Official Group Photo","caption":"The U.S. Supreme Court Poses For Official Group Photo","creditText":"Alex Wong—Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/supreme-court/","name":"Supreme Court"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/","name":"Read Justice Sotomayor and Jackson's Dissents in the Affirmative Action Case"}}]}] ```