Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Students, civil‑rights groups and lawmakers press for ban on legacy admissions
Loading...
Summary
Students, civil‑rights groups and some legislators urged the Joint Committee on Higher Education to ban legacy admissions preferences, arguing the policy gives an admissions advantage to wealthy, often white applicants and undermines equity.
Students, civil‑rights advocates and several legislators urged the Joint Committee on Higher Education to support bills that would ban legacy preferences in college admissions (S928/H1452).
Senator Adam G. Edwards opened testimony describing legacy preferences as "a relic from the 1920s" intended to exclude immigrant students and said legacy policies disproportionately advantage white applicants at elite institutions. "Legacy preferences will not be considered into your admission into public schools or into private schools in the Commonwealth," Edwards told the committee, identifying S928 (Senate) and H1442/H1452 (House) as the vehicle.
Student and alumni witnesses described how legacy admissions favor wealthier applicants and argued removing the practice would improve socioeconomic and racial diversity on elite campuses. Several student speakers from Massachusetts colleges — including speakers who identified themselves as first‑generation or low‑income and alumni who said they were legacy admits — gave personal testimony that legacy preference gives descendants of alumni a measurable admissions advantage.
The ACLU of Massachusetts and other civil‑rights advocates told the committee studies show legacy preferences dramatically increase admission odds for legacy applicants and that legacy slots can account for 10–25% of places at top universities. The ACLU urged legislators to act now, noting a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision ending race‑conscious affirmative action increases the urgency to remove legacy preferences because other routes to diversity will face legal constraints.
Higher‑education policy analysts and student leaders also testified that ending legacy preferences has not produced durable declines in alumni giving in other places that took the step. Witnesses cited examples of states and institutions that ended legacy preferences; testimony included data showing a long decline in the number of colleges using legacy preferences since 2015.
Committee members asked whether states can require private institutions to change admissions practices; witnesses noted states regulate degree‑granting authority and that some states have extended prohibitions beyond public systems. There was no committee vote during the hearing; witnesses urged a favorable report and offered to submit supporting data and lists of institutions that have dropped legacy preferences.
