Id., at 514. Another example of analogical reasoning in constitutional law arguments in the Supreme Court appeared during the oral argument in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. The lawyer for the University distinguished affirmative action quotas which have the effect of limiting the number of white students from quotas limiting the numbers of Jews because those quotas which have the effect of limiting the numbers of Jews because those quotas were stigmatizing, May it Please the Court, transcript p. 308. In the same case, Justice Brennan asked whether the affirmative action quota is "the same thing as an athletic scholarship," Id.