Institutional White Space: Amicus Briefs' Influence on Bakke (1978)

• In Event: 3155 - Inequality, Policy and Affirmative Action

Abstract

I examine if in racial inequality cases decided at the United States Supreme Court, the Justices are most likely to gravitate towards amicus briefs with legal arguments containing racial ideologies that suit their already predetermined legal conclusions which fit into their social policy preferences on race issues. As a case study, I selected the Bakke (1978) case to analyze since it not only set the precedence for affirmative action in college admissions but marked the beginning of a more restrictive view in the application of anti-discrimination law by policy makers. From my analysis of this case study, I found evidence that the Court as a whole is an intellectual white space, which supports my hypothesis that amicus briefs that have legal arguments with racial ideologies more consistent with the white dominant framework or interest convergence are more likely better received and deemed as legitimate by the Court. Likewise, amicus briefs based on racial justice rationales consistent with an expansive view of anti-discrimination laws are not entirely considered and de-legitimatized by the Court.

Author

• Gunercindo Antoneo Espinoza, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities