UC Irvine

I examine the discursive strategies used by lawmakers in state legislatures to explain and justify the slate of anti-critical race theory legislation introduced and passed in the wake of President Donald Trump’s Executive Order No. 13950 in September 2020. Using a critical discourse analysis framework, I explain how the legislators weaponize the rhetoric of colorblindness, using race-neutral language to defend legislation that is nonetheless still aimed at upholding and maintaining systems of white racial privilege. To do so, I thematically coded the language used by legislators who supported the legislation in committee and floor hearings in state legislatures where anti-CRT bills were passed to determine the common themes and strategies used to defend and justify the bills. I also use public opinion data collected during the Virginia gubernatorial election in 2021 to demonstrate how the rhetoric and arguments used by political elites in defending anti-CRT legislation has impacted public opinion and support for politicians who support anti-CRT policies.