‘Affirmative action for the rich’: Readers want an end to legacy admissions

This summer, the Supreme Court struck down race-conscious college admissions, ending the decades-long practice of affirmative action.

As a new academic year begins and admissions offices prepare for application season, they face renewed scrutiny over legacy admissions, which some of have called “affirmative action for the rich.”

We asked Boston.com readers if colleges should continue giving admission priority to the children of alumni and donors. Fifty-nine percent of the 377 readers polled said no, the practice isn’t fair. Many readers said legacy admissions seem particularly unfair in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action. 

“If affirmative action is no longer allowed, legacy status (child, grandchild, etc. of an alumnus or donor) should not be allowed either. It is affirmative action for the rich, giving a leg up on admissions to children of those who have graduated from the institution or who have donated large sums,” argued Jennifer D. from Peabody. 

Legacy admits make up anywhere from 4% to 23% of the incoming freshman class at the nation’s most selective colleges, according to an Associated Press survey. The survey found that some colleges had more legacy students than Black students. 

“Without affirmative action, which helps minority and underserved populations attend college, it should at least be as much of a level playing field as possible in the sense that each applicant needs to apply on their own merits,” Jennifer P. added. “Underserved and first-generation applicants will still be behind, but at least the wealthy will no longer be ahead.”

Several Boston-area schools currently consider legacy and donor status in their admissions process. Harvard, Tufts, Boston College, and Northeastern all include legacy status in their admissions decisions. Notably, MIT and Emerson do not. 

Harvard, where legacies are about six times more likely to be admitted, is the subject of a civil lawsuit filed by the Boston nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights. The lawsuit alleges that these admission practices violate the Civil Rights Act and disadvantage applicants of color.

Those in support of legacy admissions argue that the practice allows colleges to build intergenerational communities and ensure donations that are used to better campus life and financial aid for all students. Some readers told Boston.com that they want legacy admissions to stay in place to support their own children. 

“I donate to my old college because I want my future children to have a better chance of getting in. If they ever made an announcement that they are going ‘legacy blind’ I would stop my yearly donations. Is this right? No, but if colleges want to keep growing and expanding services — or even keep existing for some — this is the way of the world,” Juan from Boston said. “There is a reason that almost all colleges are not need-blind on admissions. And the reason those few schools are able to be need-blind? Alumni donations.”

Readers shared the reasons they think colleges should end or continue legacy admission practices. Below you’ll find a sampling of their responses. 

Some responses have been edited for length or clarity.

Should colleges give admission priority to children of alumni and donors?

No

“When you are a first-generation American, the child of an immigrant, you should be given the same chance as anyone else. Your parents may have studied abroad but your chances are limited because of this. College admissions should be solely based on academic achievement and match between the college and the applicant. Not on anything else.” — Sophie, Boston

“Let’s clarify what we (usually) mean when we’re talking about legacy admissions. We’re referring to the children or grandchildren of the extremely wealthy who either have been or intend to be, very generous donors to the institution. My kid won’t get a legacy look at my alma mater because I’ve given $100 total. So all legacy is not equal.

This is why I am against legacy admissions: it’s just one more advantage, on top of all the others, available to a small group of super-wealthy families. These kids have access to the best private schools, tutors, and college consultants and those amount to a BIG leg up in the college process without adding legacy. And, these are kids that will be highly successful in life whatever college they attend because they come from highly-resourced families. Whereas a college education could be life-changing, literally, for a first-generation student.

All of that said, I don’t think most colleges can afford to step away from legacy admissions. They want/need the money too much.” — Ali, Falmouth

“Education at all levels must be based on a match between the student and the educational goals of the school. It is about merit and cannot be a private club for the few or the ‘right kind of people’ or ‘people like us.’ Those standards fit private clubs. Society needs high quality, accurate and good education for everyone who can learn the materials.” — Sherrie N., Weymouth

“If admission is going to be based solely on merit, legacy and donor preference should also be removed. Allowing legacy and donor preference is perpetuating racism and classism. I feel these preferences should have been removed a long time ago as they clearly are not fair and create an uneven advantage for families who have connections and wealth to buy a position for their child.” — M.M., Milton

“Affirmative action was intended to give an advantage to underprivileged students and students of historically marginalized groups. However, now it’s unjustifiable to give the already privileged more privileges when the mechanism that was meant to ‘equalize’ this is gone.” — Debra B., Andover

Yes

“Many groups were exulted from top universities for decades (Black, Jewish, Hispanic, and Asian students). They were finally admitted in larger numbers starting in the late 70s and early 80s and now that they have children they are being told, ‘Sorry we know we excluded your parents and grandparents in favor of alumni and others, now that you are in a position to benefit we are going to change the rules again.’ Not to mention most legacy applicants are extremely well qualified.” — Wes S., Cohasset

“Legacy admissions create further affinity with a college or university to drive and build a long-term culture among the alumni body that extends beyond one generation. Highly selective schools have a variety of measures for admission of which legacy status is only one measure that does not otherwise impact the quality of the education and student population.” — Max W., Milton

“As a legacy student myself, it’s not a problem in my mind to give preference to an applicant who has family members who have already attended the school. It can be an effective way to sustain institutional culture as well as financial stewardship of the school. I’d likely not have even applied to my alma mater if my parents and sister hadn’t already attended ahead of me. 

That being said, I don’t think a legacy program should compete with diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. In light of the disappointing recent SCOTUS decision eliminating affirmative action, colleges should assess and prioritize legacy/DEI goals in light of their mission. However, to suggest prima facie that any school is more committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion simply for having eliminated their legacy program is, in my opinion, at best naïve, at worst, a deliberate distraction from the larger issue at hand: that we in the U.S. still live in a racist, capitalist society where higher education is a privilege for purchase and not a right of community membership.” — Brian, East Walpole

“Not all of these schools were always flush with cash. Some relied on loyalty to survive. There doesn’t need to be a penalty for loyalty and generosity. There is always someone who gets in and someone who doesn’t.” — Ralph, Brockton

“Higher education is a business, and this is a prudent business practice. Attracting students requires the most modern facilities in dorms, student centers, libraries, athletic facilities, etc. Something has to fund the development and legacy parents are a major piece in that.” — Dennis D., Boston

Boston.com occasionally interacts with readers by conducting informal polls and surveys. These results should be read as an unscientific gauge of readers’ opinion.

Zipporah Osei

Audience Engagement Editor

Zipporah Osei is an audience engagement editor for Boston.com, where she connects with readers on site and across social media.

Be civil. Be kind.

Read our full community guidelines.

Want to leave a comment?

Create an Account Or sign in to your account

To comment, please create a screen name in your profile

To comment, please verify your email address