--- 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: 2026-10-19T07:24:52.199Z 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: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=931f3c3b-867c-49ad-a6ff-59c80474cd80&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=931f3c3b-867c-49ad-a6ff-59c80474cd80&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, 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-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=931f3c3b-867c-49ad-a6ff-59c80474cd80&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=931f3c3b-867c-49ad-a6ff-59c80474cd80&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) ## Video: Biden Slams Supreme Court Ruling Against Race-Based Affirmative Action [Watch (HLS stream): Biden Slams Supreme Court Ruling Against Race-Based Affirmative Action](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/eb8LXIhN.m3u8) (3:26)  _Published 2023-06-29. The Supreme Court of the United States just limited the ability of universities to consider an applicant’s race and ethnicity in admissions. The cases—Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. University of North Carolina—struck a blow to race-conscious affirmative action programs that have been crucial in providing talented students of color access to highly selective public and private institutions._  by [Olivia B. Waxman](https://time.com/author/olivia-b-waxman/)  ## Olivia B. Waxman Staff Writer Jun 29, 2023 5:19 PM UTC The Supreme Court of the United States just limited the ability of universities to consider an applicant’s race and ethnicity in admissions. The cases—Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. University of North Carolina—struck a blow to race-conscious affirmative action programs that have been crucial in providing talented students of color access to highly selective public and private institutions.  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.” ## Transcript Today, the court once again, walked away from Decades of precedent and make as a descent is made clear to the Saint States, decision, quote package of precedent and momentous progress. And the quote, I agree with that statement from The Descendants are from The Descent. The court has effectively ended affirmative action in college admissions. My strong strongly disagree with the Court's decision. Many people wrongly believed that affirmative action allows unqualified students unqualified students to be admitted. He had to qualify students. This is not, this is not how College admissions work. Rather colleges set out standards for the mission and every student every student has to meet those standards then. And only, then that's the first meeting the qualifications required, by the school to college, for the other factors in addition to their grades such as race. I've always believed. One of the greatest strengths of America you tired of hearing me. Say it is our diversity. But I believe that if you have any doubt about this, just look at the United States military. The finest fighting force in the history of the world. It's been a model of diversity. And is not only been Army donation, better stronger, but safer. I believe the same is true for schools. I've always believed that the promise of America is big enough for everyone to succeed and that every generation Americans we have benefited by opening the doors of opportunity, just a little bit wider to include those when I left behind. I believe our colleges are stronger. When they are racially diverse. Our nation is stronger because we use will be because we are tapping into the full range of talents Nation. We cannot let this decision be the last word. One of them. We cannot let this decision be the last word. All the court can render a decision. It cannot change what America stands for. America's an idea, an idea unique in the world. My dear, hope and opportunity of possibilities. I'm giving everyone a fair shot. I'm leaving no one behind it. Never fully lived up to it, but we've never walked away from it either. We will not walk away from it. Now, we should never allow the country to walk away from the dream upon which it was found that opportunity is for everyone. Not just a few, we need A New Path forward, a path consistent with the law that protects diversity, and expands opportunity, and should not have been as should not have been in their commitment to ensure student bodies of diverse backgrounds and experiences that reflect all of America. When I proposed consideration is a newsstand or colleges take into account, the adversity. As soon as overcome When selecting among qualified applicants, let's be clear to standard. This is what's true under the earlier standard students, first have to be qualified applicants because the truth is, we all know it discrimination still exists in America discrimination still exists in America discrimination still exists in America. Today's decision does not change that. So, simple fact, it was student has has, overcome had to overcome adversity on their path, education, should recognize in value that. ```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":"2026-10-19T07:24:52.199Z","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"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Biden Slams Supreme Court Ruling Against Race-Based Affirmative Action","description":"The Supreme Court of the United States just limited the ability of universities to consider an applicant’s race and ethnicity in admissions. The cases—Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University and Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. University of North Carolina—struck a blow to race-conscious affirmative action programs that have been crucial in providing talented students of color access to highly selective public and private institutions.","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/eb8LXIhN/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2023-06-29T20:48:33.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/eb8LXIhN.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/","duration":"PT3M26S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/6291230/affirmative-action-dissent-jackson-sotomayor/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```