On Sept. 30 California became the second state after Maryland to prohibit private universities from giving special consideration to applicants who are related to alumni and donors, also known as “legacies.” This is a step in the right direction, legacy admissions are ultimately a discriminatory and ineffective predictor of a student’s ability to succeed in college. Eliminating this practice is crucial to addressing inequity in the higher education system.
According to a 2024 report from the Institute of Higher Education Policy, 42% of private universities in the 2022 to 2023 academic year considered legacy status in admissions. The practice is especially prevalent among more selective universities. A 2020 investigation conducted by the Wall Street Journal found that 80% of the 64 U.S. colleges who have a 25% or lower acceptance rate consider legacy in their admissions.
The widely adopted practice was founded on discriminatory principles. In 2023, National Geographic reported that legacy admissions were initially introduced as a way for private universities to limit the number of Jewish students admitted. The practice began at Yale in 1922, after Robert Nelson, the University’s admissions chairman, wrote a “Memorandum on Jewish Representation at Yale” in which he argued that, despite Jewish students seeing similar academic success as their peers, they “graduate from college as alien in morals and manners as they were upon admission.” He suggested that the University implement “non-intellectual requirements” in order to reduce the number of Jewish admitted students.
Legacy admissions disadvantage students of color, particularly Black students. Though landmark legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Higher Education Act of 1965 increased access to higher education for marginalized groups, many Black students and other students of color entered predominantly white institutions later than their white peers. As a result, they had fewer alumni connections who attended these institutions. A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that today, 70% of legacy and donor-related admitted students are white. This is problematic when considering that a 2023 study published by Harvard University found that legacy students were four times more likely to be accepted than students with similar test scores and grades. This systemic advantage perpetuates disparities in admissions, which can only worsen with the cessation of affirmative action.
Last June, the Supreme Court ruled to end affirmative action, a process which allowed universities to consider an applicant’s race in admissions. In defense of the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote “Many universities have for too long […] concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, or lessons learned but the color of their skin.” Claiming to ban affirmative action to promote merit based admissions while still permitting universities to privilege applicants based on their familial connections is contradictory and harmful.
A Princeton Study found that legacy students were “more likely to suffer academically than minority students or athletes who also received an admissions edge.” The study also noted children of alumni had lower retention rates than non-legacies in universities that were identified as “having a stronger commitment to legacy admissions.” Legacy admissions are ultimately an ineffective predictor of student success in college. Such a practice cannot justify its existence without the presence of affirmative action to account for the disparities in prospective students of color’s alumni networks.
Supporters of legacy admissions have argued that the practice helps foster community and create family ties to an alma mater. In a Washington Post opinion piece, Steven B. Gerrard, a professor at Williams College, argued that because of legacy admissions, “When our students metamorphose into alumni, they do not leave us behind. They still feel part of our intergenerational community.” He continued, “Most alumni at some point happily contemplate the possibility of their offspring wearing their school colors, whether that ultimately happens or not.”
While fostering this sense of community is important, legacy admissions are not an effective strategy. Universities should seek alternative approaches when it comes to forming connections with alumni, such as mentorship programs, fundraising campaigns or hosting reunions.
Prospective students who are descendents of alumni of four year universities are already at an advantage to their first-generation counterparts, so continuing to widen the gap does not make sense. Relation to alumni or donors does not make a case for a prospective student’s character, academic capabilities, or talent. Students put in so much effort in order to attend college, from maintaining high grade point averages to racking up extracurriculars, and they deserve better than the added pressure that comes with competing against legacies who receive preferential treatment.
Editor-in-Chief: Jordan Premmer, Chief Copy Editor: Sophia McCrackin, Managing Editor: Jordan DelFiugo, Opinion Editor: Dakota Duran, Scene Editor: Elina Graham
