Trump Ignores Legacy Admissions in Merit-Based Push Amid Affirmative Action Crackdown

President Donald Trump’s push to eliminate race-based preferences in college admissions has drawn widespread attention, but his efforts have notably left out legacy admissions, a practice critics call “affirmative action for the rich.” While his administration has taken steps to ban overt racial considerations in admissions, it has not addressed policies that give preferential treatment to applicants based on their family ties or donor status [1].

Trump has emphasized merit and test scores in his education reforms and has criticized systems he deems “rigged.” However, he has remained silent on legacy admissions, which offer a significant advantage to the children of alumni and donors. Richard Kahlenberg, a researcher at the Progressive Policy Institute, argues that legacy preferences exemplify a rigged system. “Rarely is a system of hereditary privilege so openly practiced without any sense of shame,” he said [1].

Recent actions by the Trump administration include negotiating settlements with Brown and Columbia universities to ensure compliance with the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that struck down affirmative action in college admissions. These settlements require the schools to share admissions data. Last week, Trump issued an executive action calling for universities nationwide to submit information to verify that they do not consider race in admissions [1].

Despite these efforts, some critics and lawmakers are calling for further action. Senator Todd Young, a Republican from Indiana, praised the settlement with Brown but argued that restoring meritocracy requires more than ending race-based policies. He co-sponsored legislation in 2023 aimed at ending legacy admissions and stated on social media that federally accredited institutions should eliminate all preferences based on ancestry [1].

Legacy admissions are still widely used by selective universities. According to 2023 disclosures, about 500 universities consider legacy status, including more than half of the nation’s 100 most selective schools. All eight Ivy League schools continue the practice. In July, Stanford University decided to retain its legacy admissions policy even after a California law barred it at state-funded institutions. The university chose to forgo state aid rather than eliminate the policy, despite a $140 million budget deficit [1].

The Trump administration has not mentioned legacy admissions in its recent executive actions or Justice Department memos. The latter clarified that practices like geographic targeting and personal essays that focus on adversity could be considered proxies for racial discrimination. However, legacy preferences were not addressed [1].

Lawyers for Civil Rights, a nonprofit, filed a complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard’s use of donor and alumni preferences amounts to illegal racial discrimination. The complaint argues that these preferences disproportionately benefit white students. Oren Sellstrom, the group’s litigation director, said Trump should end legacy preferences to create a merit-based admissions system. “These deeply unmeritocratic preferences simply reward students based on who their parents are. It’s hard to imagine anything more unfair or contrary to basic merit principles,” he said [1].

Public opinion on legacy and donor preferences is largely negative. An AP-NORC poll from 2023 found that most Americans believe these policies should not play a strong role in admissions. However, universities are not required to disclose how much of an impact these preferences have on admissions decisions [1].

Supporters of legacy admissions argue that the practice fosters a sense of community and encourages donations. Some claim it increasingly benefits nonwhite students as campuses become more diverse. Georgetown University kept its legacy policy this year after reviewing it and concluding that legacy applicants mirrored the broader applicant pool. However, these arguments have not swayed public opinion.

Trump’s focus on merit-based admissions may inadvertently reduce diversity, warns Justin Driver, a Yale law professor. He argues that the administration’s actions could lead universities to limit minority enrollment to avoid scrutiny. “I believe that the United States confronts a lot of problems today,” Driver said. “Too many Black students on first-rate college campuses is not among them.” [1]

Sources:

[1] https://fortune.com/2025/08/18/what-is-legacy-admissions-affirmative-action-for-the-rich-trump/