This thesis presents an analysis of 10 United States Supreme Court opinions between 1989 and 1994, and uncovers the normative assumptions which pervade and impoverish the Court\u27s discourse on poverty. Positing two research questions, this thesis investigates the possible existence of a trend in the Court\u27s written opinons on poverty. The statistical tests and thematic analysis depict two trends in the Court\u27s rhetorical construction of its poverty opinions. First, the Court is more likely to label the poor petitioner as undeserving and morally deviant as opposed to deserving of preferential treatment. Second, the Court is more likely to invoke pleas of helplessness than attempt to empower itself when ruling on poverty issues
