Legacy Admissions & the Constitution

For the past week, in my undergraduate educational law course, we have been talking about desegregation and affirmative action. As such, we have been discussing Grutter v. Bollinger and Parents Involved v. Seattle.  These cases both concerned admission decisions based on race, at the higher ed. and K-12 levels, respectively. In our discussions, we have talked a lot about admission policies and all the different factors that can be considered when admitting a student to a university. One of those admission factors my colleagues and I always point out is legacy admissions. All of the students are somewhat sour on legacy admissions, as am I, so I thought I would point out this New York Times article (also this ABA Journal) on legacy admissions and a new, unique way of considering their unconstitutionality under the Nobility Clause of the Constitution.

LII: Constitution via kwout

Comments

[Myra Key]

The reality is that legacy admissions will continue to occur. We continue to live in a time when money equals power, and power can get your son or daughter admitted almost anywhere. Legacy admissions is just a continued attempt to make sure certain people get an education no matter what, while others get left out in the cold.

[Justin]

I agree with you on this Myra. It is a by-product of a by-gone age and it is something we need to look at getting rid of as soon as possible. But, I do think it would be possible to end legacy admissions. I think you could enact state-by-state statutes banning legacy as a consideration in admissions. I think such a statute would have wide-spread support. Now, of course, the higher ed. lobby and a lot of business interests may be against such a law, but votes still matter and this is just the kind of populist bill that could get a governor elected. (Of course, chances are that the person running for governor would probably be a beneficiary of legacy admissions).