In 1997, the Center for Individuals' Rights filed two lawsuits against the University of Michigan on behalf of two White plaintiffs who believed they were denied admission due to racial preferences. The diversity rationale, Michigan's counter-argument, underscored the links between racial diversity and institutional mission but rejected social justice arguments of equity and remediation. Through qualitative inquiry, this study explores how Michigan shifts the focus of the affirmative action debate from social justice to a narrower diversity argument, which garners broad support and neutralizes the racial preferences rhetoric.