# Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (April 22, 2014) On **April 22, 2014**, the Supreme Court ruled **6–2** that Michigan voters could ban race-conscious admissions at the state's public universities. The ban, **Proposal 2**, was approved by voters in 2006 as an amendment to the Michigan Constitution. Justice [[Anthony Kennedy]] wrote the lead opinion; Justice [[Sonia Sotomayor]] dissented. Justice [[Elena Kagan]] took no part. **Why it matters:** after [[Gratz v. Bollinger]] and [[Grutter v. Bollinger]] set the national rules for affirmative action in 2003, opponents turned to state ballot measures to ban it outright. *Schuette* confirmed that those bans are constitutional, nine years before [[Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard]] ended race-conscious admissions nationwide. ## The case Proposal 2 came out of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative campaign that followed the University of Michigan cases. A coalition of civil-rights groups and students sued. The full Sixth Circuit struck the amendment down in 2012, relying on the Supreme Court's "political process" cases, which bar states from restructuring government in ways that single out minority groups' interests for special burdens. Michigan's attorney general, Bill Schuette, appealed. The Court heard argument on **October 15, 2013**. ## What the Court held No single opinion won a majority, but six justices agreed to reverse: - **Kennedy**, joined by Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] and Justice [[Samuel Alito]], wrote that the case was about who decides, not whether race-conscious admissions are allowed: "Democracy does not presume that some subjects are either too divisive or too profound for public debate." - **[[Antonin Scalia]]**, joined by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]], would have overruled the political-process cases altogether. - **[[Stephen Breyer]]** agreed that the amendment was valid because it moved the decision from unelected university officials to voters. ## The dissent Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], argued that a majority of Michigan voters had "changed the basic rules of the political process in that State in a manner that uniquely disadvantaged racial minorities." ## Why it's on the map *Schuette* is the ballot-box half of the campaign against affirmative action. Lawsuits narrowed the policy in court while state ballot measures banned it outright; the Supreme Court's approval here cleared the way for that strategy before the 2023 ruling made it unnecessary. ## Connections - [[Affirmative Action]] · [[Gratz v. Bollinger]] · [[Grutter v. Bollinger]] · [[Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard]] - [[Equal Protection Clause]] · [[Edward Blum]] - [[Anthony Kennedy]] · [[Sonia Sotomayor]] · [[Antonin Scalia]] - [[Supreme Court Rulings Hub]] ## Sources - [Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 572 U.S. 291 (2014) — Justia](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/572/291/) - [Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action — Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuette_v._Coalition_to_Defend_Affirmative_Action) - [Supreme Court Affirms Ban On Race-Conscious College Admissions — NPR (2014-04-22)](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/22/305850221/supreme-court-affirms-ban-on-race-conscious-college-admissions)