California banned college legacy admissions. Will it change who enters?

When California banned private colleges from favoring the children of donors and alumni in the admissions process, it was meant to help level the playing field for prospective students after the Supreme Court ended affirmative action.

But some college counselors say the ban probably won’t make much of a difference.

“It’s not going to have as big an impact as people think. It’s more symbolic,” said Julio Mata, president of the Western College Admissions Counseling Association. “It may open up some spots for regular students, but it won’t completely change the landscape.”

The new law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September, prohibits private colleges in California from giving admissions preference to students with connections to alumni or donors. The University of California banned the practice 25 years ago.

Rep. Phil Ting, a San Francisco Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, said the new law will make the college admissions process “fairer and more equitable.”

“Legacy admissions helps students who need it the least,” Ting said. “This country is supposed to be a meritocracy. Students who already have every advantage shouldn’t be taking places away from students who have worked so hard to get there.”

Inspired by the Varsity Blues scandal

The law follows a similar bill by Ting that was set to expire this year. That law required California’s private universities to publicly report how many legacy students they admitted, but did not prohibit the practice.

Ting’s original bill was inspired by the Varsity Blues scandal that broke in 2019, in which wealthy parents bribed consultants or coaches to get their children into elite colleges. In California, Stanford, USC, UC Berkeley and UCLA were involved.

Under the new law, which will take effect in September 2025, the state attorney general can take legal action against colleges that fail to comply, but at one point it would have gone a step further. In the original version, the bill called for heavy financial penalties for schools that violate the ban, but the bill’s sponsors dropped that provision after private colleges complained and it appeared the bill would not pass.

While the law isn’t perfect, it’s an important step toward leveling the playing field, Ting said.

“My hope is that the institutions follow the law. Not just the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law,” Ting said.

But limited penalties and the fact that colleges self-report their data make the law far less effective, councilors said. Also, the admissions process at selective private colleges is already so opaque and nuanced that connections often have limited traction, Mata and others said. The University of Southern California, for example, receives 80,000 applications a year and admits about 8,200. Even if every place were for a child of former students or donors, there would not be enough places for everyone.

“‘Legacy’ was never a golden ticket,” Mata said. “It’s just one factor in admissions. And not every alumni or donor will be viewed with equal weight. Some are more notable than others.”

And it is not clear whether the colleges will comply. Some might be willing to risk a lawsuit or potentially lose state-provided financial aid to admit whomever they want. Many colleges said legacy admissions were a crucial part of their fundraising efforts. Asked if Stanford plans to comply with the new law, a spokesperson said, “The legislation will not take effect until September 2025. During that time, Stanford will continue to review its admissions policies.”

Colleges and counselors said they had yet to hear pushback from wealthy parents.

Stanford law professor Rick Banks said the new law is well thought out because legacy admissions overwhelmingly favors white and wealthy students, but he still opposes it.

“Despite the unfairness of legacy preferences, private universities should be allowed to rely on them because they are absolutely fundamental to the fundraising model on which universities depend,” said Banks, founder of the Stanford Center for Racial Justice, in an interview on the Stanford website.

Asked how he thought private colleges should respond to the law, he said they probably shouldn’t bother.

“I don’t know that universities should challenge the ban because there’s no basis to enforce it,” Banks said. “The law simply provides for a kind of moral shaming of universities, as those who break the law will have that fact publicized by the government.”

Adrian Navarro, a college and career counselor at Oakland Technical High School, said he was happy to hear about the law because “anything that opens up opportunities for our students, for different communities, is great.”

“I felt like the Varsity Blues scandal was swept under the rug,” Navarro said. “It’s gratifying to see some action for students who, because of historical inequalities, don’t have the benefit of rich parents.”

Students would have been admitted anyway

Although they fought the bill, some private colleges said they would comply with the law and that it would make no difference to their admissions process because all their students meet the admissions criteria anyway. In general, admissions criteria for private schools are based on a number of factors, including academic performance, leadership skills, ability to overcome challenges, and how a student can benefit from the opportunities of a specific school

Still, six of California’s 90 private nonprofit colleges said they admit hundreds of students a year based on alumni or donor connections, according to information they provided to the state In fall 2023, USC admitted 1,791 students with alumni or donor ties. Stanford admitted 295. Santa Clara University admitted 38, but the year before that number was 1,133. Harvey Mudd College, Claremont McKenna College and Northeastern University in Oakland also admitted at least one student with donor or alumni ties.

These schools also note that they admit large numbers of students who are the first in their families to attend college, and are committed to building diverse student bodies despite last year’s Supreme Court ruling banning the ‘affirmative action.

USC student Manqi Cai poses for a photo during a “Trojan Family Graduation Celebration” hosted by USC, which previously canceled its commencement ceremony main stage amid pro-Palestinian protests at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum in Los Angeles on May 9. 2024.

(

Photo by Carlin Stiehl

/

Reuters

)

“All admitted students meet our high academic standards through a contextualized holistic review that values ​​each student’s lived experience, considers how they will contribute to the vitality of our campus, thrive in our community, benefit from a USC and will fulfill the commitments of our unification. values,” USC spokeswoman Lauren Bartlett said in an email.

Richard Turner, a Stanford graduate who lives in Piedmont in the East Bay, said he was upset when affirmative action ended because he believes racism remains a systemic problem in America, but he had mixed feelings when it ended inherited admissions. As an African-American parent, he hoped his daughters would benefit from one, if not both policies.

“Legacy admissions perpetuate privilege,” said Turner, a physician. “But on the other hand, we all know that connections are vitally important. Would I have used every advantage I have to enroll my daughters? Yes, I absolutely would.”

Neither of his daughters ended up at Stanford, which disappointed him. But both did well at their chosen schools, he said.

“It has to be fair”

Daniel Alfaro, a senior at Oakland Tech High School, said he’s glad the state stopped supporting the legacy. Colleges should admit students based only on their abilities, he said, “not on who their parents are.”

Alfaro’s own parents can’t help him much with his college applications. Immigrants from Latin America, they work long hours, have limited English skills, and don’t have much education. But he said they have always encouraged him to study hard and pursue higher education.

Alfaro said he looks forward to making them proud. This year he is taking three advanced classes, plays two sports and is studying French, economics and political science at a local university. He is also active in the Latino Student Union and the Key Club. He said he often stays up until 3 a.m. studying to maintain a near-perfect grade point average.

“Education is a privilege,” said Alfaro, who hopes to study biotechnology or kinesiology in college. “I feel like for my family, they’ve made so many sacrifices so we could go to college. So for me, it all comes down to this moment. And it should be fair.”