Brett Kavanaugh
Role at the time: Supreme Court justice writing a concurrence
Defended or excused
Statement summary
Kavanaugh argues that the ruling follows Grutter's 25-year expectation and its requirement that racial preferences be temporary.
“In light of the Constitution’s text, history, and precedent, the Court’s decision today appropriately respects and abides by Grutter’s explicit temporal limit on the use of race-based affirmative action in higher education.”
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and UNC: opinions · Supreme Court of the United States
The majority, concurrences and dissents address the challenged admissions programs. Jackson participates only in the UNC case.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Why we used this label
His concurrence directly defends the challenged ruling. Acknowledging racial inequality does not make his evaluation of that ruling mixed.