Resumo:
This paper aims to analyze, from the perspective of social development, access to
education and justice, the debates and arguments between governmental and non-governmental
actors (Universities, Associations, Foundations, social movements, among others), no The
scope of the Judiciary Power, when judging the compatibility of the public policy of social
quotas, based on the ethnic-racial criterion of the University of Brasília (UNB), with the rules
that govern the Brazilian State. In this context, regardless of the different modalities of social
quotas, the work will be centered on the hypothesis aimed exclusively at a black population
(including blacks and browns, according to the Racial Equality Statute, Law No. 12,288 / 2010).
The focus will be on investigating the performance of social actors and agents directly linked
to the State, and what were their influences before the Supreme Federal Court (STF), with no
intention of verifying whether the final legal act reflected society's wishes. The research is
focused on the analysis of the reason for being of the norm, its teleological and hermeneutic
aspects, probing how the actors involved unveiled the nucleus of politics at the highest stage of
the Brazilian Judiciary, in the aspects of development and education. This central point is
consistent with the study of educational legislation as a social technology that also presents
itself as a determinant in the interfaces with social development. In the dissertation, in search
of the objectives pursued, the qualitative methodology, based on Studies by Richardson (2017),
will be used, since it will investigate the description of the arguments made available by the
actors involved, in favor or against public policy, in addition to explaining the result and the
final effects of the procedure for society in general. To deliver a dense and coherent research, I
will make use of extensive document analysis, both written and unwritten, such as the records
of the debates held at the Judiciary headquarters, compiled at the public hearings of March
2010, using a content analysis as a methodological procedure.
