Clarence Thomas
Role at the time: U.S. Supreme Court justice, in a concurring opinion
Defended or excused
Statement summary
Thomas says Harvard's and UNC's admissions policies fail strict scrutiny and joins the majority opinion in full.
“Because the Court today applies genuine strict scrutiny to the race-conscious admissions policies employed at Harvard and the University of North Carolina (UNC) and finds that they fail that searching review, I join the majority opinion in full.”
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
The action examined here is the Court's rejection of Harvard's and UNC's challenged admissions programs. Thomas expressly joins and justifies that result. He is defending the ruling, not defending the admissions programs.