In September 2024, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law that stopped private California schools, including the University of Southern California and Stanford University, from accepting students based on legacy admissions. Other states, such as Maryland and Illinois, have taken similar steps. This pathway for California and others will inspire a national consensus that colleges should open the doors for higher education for all, not the select few whose family lineage gives them increased access to future wealth.
Between 2014 and 2019, Harvard accepted legacies at a rate of 33%, more than five times its overall acceptance rate. On top of that, over 70% of legacy students at the best universities in the nation are white, displaying the long, harmful history of legacy admissions. That’s not to say white people are an inherent negative to college campuses; however, diversity is always a positive compared to uniformity.
Historically, legacy-based admissions were introduced within colleges in the 1920s to curb the increasing number of Jewish applicants. With the fear of more Jewish students attending, colleges feared a smaller majority of white Protestant applicants would be interested. Consequently, colleges increasingly utilized their admissions to create the intended student body demographic. Over time, with more African Americans attempting to reach higher education, colleges became aware of their power, leading to an increase in racist admission gatekeeping.
The selective, discriminatory, and handpicked admission traditions are nothing new, and this disparity in diversity over a prolonged time shows how colleges have gotten away with much more than they realized. Trusted institutions, especially in education, are sometimes viewed through rose-colored glasses, meaning the general public isn’t aware of the very racist past of these beloved institutions. With more awareness brought to those who care about education, more corrections can be made for a more diverse future.
But are the new corrections for legacy admissions here to level the playing field or just move the goalposts?
Similar policy changes, including targeted admissions that select more applicants from underrepresented areas, are an attempt to remove systems of injustice that have benefited white Americans for generations and excluded black and brown families. However, the admissions process cannot expunge deep-rooted socioeconomic injustice as easily. Generational poverty and neglect are cycles of injustice. Those cycles are not easily broken and require extensive political reform; inevitably, conflict comes with that.
Removal of legacy admissions is not inherently harmful, and there is a notion around it that American higher education should be 100% meritocratic. The Supreme Court’s recent ban on affirmative action in 2023 is a perfect example of that. While full merit-based judgment is the dream, it ignores the many generations of Black families who were not judged based on their merit but on their skin color. To have years of exclusion based on something non-meritocratic, like race, and then turn around and push for admissions to be based on merit is a switch for the better, but neglects the fact that inequality from before remains. In 2025, the number of African American students applying and being admitted to various colleges has decreased since the repeal of affirmative action, exposing the unsolved problem of education inequality in America, along with rising tuition.
This is where the issue becomes complex and intertwined, with affirmative action previously helping the Black youth and bridging that gap. A multitude of generational factors have kept higher education out of the hands of African Americans, and the necessary measure to close that gap is to factor race into those decisions. But wasn’t the goal for race not to be a factor? For roughly 150 years, the system was race-based and discriminatory, only benefiting white Americans. Recently, the pendulum has swung, and affirmative action has used race to try and include those previously denied. Others argue that affirmative action is not meritocratic but simply tries to include those previously underrepresented.
Through that struggle, some families of color have found their way into top universities despite discrimination. For those upwardly mobile Black families who are now finally in a position to benefit from legacy admissions, it is too late for the legacy party.
We too often associate legacy with white students because, historically, white students have benefited the most from legacy admissions; however, in 2025, Black students cannot reap the benefits of legacy from alumni parents who worked twice as hard to find their way into elite colleges.
That’s not to say Gov. Newsom’s attempts have some ill-informed racist intent; however, Newsom and other policymakers’ attempts at systemic correction often perpetuate the continued exclusion of upwardly mobile Black families in our modern societal landscape.
Although it may seem that race and ethnicity are being removed from any sort of decision for college, that may only apply to minority students. Class and family financials are still very much a factor, benefiting specifically Asian American and White American families. The key here is balance: colleges should be a diverse ecosystem with high and low-earning families. From the outside, only admitting high-earning families comes off as classist and an attempt to keep money in the school instead of producing the minds of tomorrow.
As mentioned previously, removing race as a factor is, on a surface level, the right move; however, decades of race as a defining factor have created a chasm of disparity that cannot be closed by a merit-based system.
Upperclass families are still consolidating their wealth through the college process.
College is about connections, and if the only people connecting are other rich people, then our industries become exclusive and difficult to break into; that’s done to keep the money flowing through the same groups.
Ultimately, colleges are businesses that seek to profit from people who want to attend their college. Although colleges value students based on merit, naturally, wealthier families will be at an advantage. The ability to get tutoring, support the school, have a family history, or know the school’s staff is more available to wealthy families. These bans, which stop factors like legacy admissions, seek to close a disparity that has been mustering throughout American history. In short, it’s not going to happen overnight. This is a highly complex issue, and it isn’t easy to please everybody. A combination of time and an entirely meritocratic system might not close the gap. The push for advocacy and awareness against the racial and class divide will push higher education into a space of inclusion and the betterment of society, which the university intended to be.
Be First to Comment