{"title":"Case Study 1: The Gratz and Grutter Supreme Court Cases against the University of Michigan","authors":"J. S. Carter, Cameron D Lippard","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781529201116.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this chapter is to understand arguments put forth by these social authorities (individuals and groups) in support and opposition to affirmative action within a prominent debate on affirmative action in higher education admissions. We are particularly interested in advocacy groups that have the ability and resources not afforded to most individuals to lobby the Supreme Court. We used the Gratz v. Bollinger et al. and Grutter v. Bollinger et al. U.S. Supreme Court cases as the site of the first case study. We look at how these entities deployed specific arguments and rhetoric within court documents to frame affirmative action to Supreme Court Justices. In particular, while all frames were considered, we look at two discursive frames prominent in the literature and how they were used by supporters and opponents of the policy: color-blind and threat frames. Findings demonstrate that while supporters often used color-blind arguments (and some threat as well), the opponent briefs were saturated with both color-blind frames.","PeriodicalId":229364,"journal":{"name":"The Death of Affirmative Action?","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Death of Affirmative Action?","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529201116.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to understand arguments put forth by these social authorities (individuals and groups) in support and opposition to affirmative action within a prominent debate on affirmative action in higher education admissions. We are particularly interested in advocacy groups that have the ability and resources not afforded to most individuals to lobby the Supreme Court. We used the Gratz v. Bollinger et al. and Grutter v. Bollinger et al. U.S. Supreme Court cases as the site of the first case study. We look at how these entities deployed specific arguments and rhetoric within court documents to frame affirmative action to Supreme Court Justices. In particular, while all frames were considered, we look at two discursive frames prominent in the literature and how they were used by supporters and opponents of the policy: color-blind and threat frames. Findings demonstrate that while supporters often used color-blind arguments (and some threat as well), the opponent briefs were saturated with both color-blind frames.
本章的目的是理解这些社会权威(个人和团体)在一场关于高等教育招生中的平权行动的著名辩论中支持和反对平权行动的论点。我们特别感兴趣的是那些拥有大多数个人无法提供的能力和资源来游说最高法院的倡导团体。我们使用了Gratz v. Bollinger et al和Grutter v. Bollinger et al。以美国最高法院案件为网站的第一个案例研究。我们看看这些实体如何在法庭文件中部署具体的论点和修辞,向最高法院大法官提出平权法案。特别是,在考虑所有框架的同时,我们研究了文献中突出的两个话语框架,以及政策的支持者和反对者如何使用它们:色盲框架和威胁框架。调查结果表明,虽然支持者经常使用色盲论点(以及一些威胁),但对手的简报中充斥着两种色盲框架。