After the Supreme Court Ends Affirmative Action, There Is No Justification for Legacy Admissions

Originally posted in The Messenger

In a momentous ruling, the Supreme Court has rendered a solemn decision to bring an end to affirmative action. This will have far-reaching implications for equity in higher education admissions. Policymakers and leaders within higher education institutions and systems are confronted with an intensified urgency to reaffirm the significance of racial diversity and its crucial role in education. We must, therefore, explore all lawful avenues and redouble efforts in promoting racial equity.

Proponents for affirmative action in in front of U.S. Supreme CourtChip Somodevilla/Getty Images

This legal process has sparked critical debates about what fair and unbiased admission practices should look like. Proponents of the court's decision argued that affirmative action undermines the principles of meritocracy and equal opportunity. On the opposite side, advocates of affirmative action policies argued that these practices were put in place to redress historical injustices and promote equity and diversity.

But we need to ask ourselves: Can we really talk about meritocracy and equal opportunity in our current society and systems in which individuals start the race of life with drastically different advantages and opportunities? From underfunded schools to biased testing systems, many systemic barriers hinder the academic success and advancement of students from marginalized communities.

No matter what you think, now that the Supreme Court sided with the principles of equal opportunity in higher education admissions, there is simply no rational justification left for the existence of practices such as legacy admissions or preferential access for relatives of donors. Especially at this time when educational opportunities for underrepresented student populations will likely be severely curtailed, it is critical that we question and reevaluate admissions practices that primarily favor white, affluent and privileged students.

Several states, including New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts, have introduced bills calling for the end of legacy admissions. At the federal level, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) are reintroducing the Fair College Admissions for Student Act. Extensive research has consistently revealed that legacy preferences in college admissions not only disproportionately advantage privileged white students, but also result in preferential treatment for applicants with familial ties to an institution, even when their qualifications do not measure up to those of other applicants.

By banning legacy and/or preferential admissions, these bills can start addressing these glaringly unjust practices that perpetuate inequities in access and success, particularly for underrepresented student populations.

Similarly, it is past time that we reconsider practices such as early decision plans. Early decision requires students to commit to attending an institution if accepted before comparing financial aid offers. This disadvantages low-income and first-generation students who rely heavily on financial aid packages to make informed decisions about their college choices. Research has shown that early decision plans tend to benefit students from privileged backgrounds, as they have more financial resources and may not require as much financial aid. Eliminating or reforming early decision policies would promote greater equity in the college admissions process and ensure that students have the opportunity to consider financial aid options before making binding college commitments.

As we move forward in the post-affirmative action era, it is essential that we end practices that disfavor underrepresented student populations and explore alternative approaches that promote diversity, inclusivity and equal access. Addressing systemic inequalities will require a broader commitment to comprehensive educational reforms, equitable funding, more need-based financial aid, as well as promoting support systems that uplift marginalized students throughout their academic journey. Going beyond higher education, we need to invest in early childhood education, in wealth-building interventions and in building resources in underserved communities so that we can foster an environment where every individual has a genuine opportunity to succeed.

Robert Hildreth is a former International Monetary Fund economist. He founded the nonprofit research and policy center Hildreth Institute, dedicated to restoring the promise of higher education. He is also the founder and chairman of the board of college access nonprofit Inversant.