It’s been called affirmative action for the rich: Harvard University’s special admissions treatment for students whose parents are alumni, or whose relatives donated money. And in a complaint filed on Monday, a legal activist group demanded that the federal government put an end to it, arguing that fairness was even more imperative after the Supreme Court last week severely limited race-conscious admissions. Three Boston-area groups requested that the education department review the practice, saying the admissions policies discriminated against black, Hispanic and Asian applicants, in favour of less qualified white candidates with alumni and donor connections.
“Why are we rewarding children for privileges and advantages accrued by prior generations?” asked Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, executive director of Lawyers for Civil Rights, which is handling the case. “Your family’s last name and the size of your bank account are not a measure of merit, and should have no bearing on the college admissions process.” The complaint from liberal groups comes days after a conservative group, Students for Fair Admissions, won its Supreme Court case. And it adds to accelerating pressure on colleges to eliminate special preferences for the children of alumni and donors.
The Office for Civil Rights of the education department, which would review the complaint, may already be gearing up to investigate. In a statement after the Supreme Court decision, President Joe Biden said he would ask the department to examine “practices like legacy admissions and other systems that expand privilege instead of opportunity.”
A Harvard spokesperson reiterated a statement from last week: “As we said, in the weeks and months ahead, the university will determine how to preserve our essential values, consistent with the court’s new precedent.” Colleges argue that the practice helps build community and encourages donations, which can be used for financial aid. A poll last year by the Pew Research Center found that an increasing share of the public – 75% – believed that legacy preferences should not be a factor.
Peter Arcidiacono, an economist who has analysed Harvard data, found that a typical white legacy applicant’s chances of being admitted increase five-fold over a typical, white non-legacy applicant. Even so, eliminating legacy preferences, the study said, would not offset the loss in diversity if race-conscious admissions were also eliminated.
“Why are we rewarding children for privileges and advantages accrued by prior generations?” asked Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, executive director of Lawyers for Civil Rights, which is handling the case. “Your family’s last name and the size of your bank account are not a measure of merit, and should have no bearing on the college admissions process.” The complaint from liberal groups comes days after a conservative group, Students for Fair Admissions, won its Supreme Court case. And it adds to accelerating pressure on colleges to eliminate special preferences for the children of alumni and donors.
The Office for Civil Rights of the education department, which would review the complaint, may already be gearing up to investigate. In a statement after the Supreme Court decision, President Joe Biden said he would ask the department to examine “practices like legacy admissions and other systems that expand privilege instead of opportunity.”
A Harvard spokesperson reiterated a statement from last week: “As we said, in the weeks and months ahead, the university will determine how to preserve our essential values, consistent with the court’s new precedent.” Colleges argue that the practice helps build community and encourages donations, which can be used for financial aid. A poll last year by the Pew Research Center found that an increasing share of the public – 75% – believed that legacy preferences should not be a factor.
Peter Arcidiacono, an economist who has analysed Harvard data, found that a typical white legacy applicant’s chances of being admitted increase five-fold over a typical, white non-legacy applicant. Even so, eliminating legacy preferences, the study said, would not offset the loss in diversity if race-conscious admissions were also eliminated.