WASHINGTON (CN) — The U.S. Department of Education revealed Tuesday it will investigate Harvard University for giving admission preferences to potential students related to Harvard donors and alumni after civil rights groups challenged the elite university’s policy, claiming it unfairly benefited wealthy, white applicants.
The department announced the probe in a Monday letter to Lawyers for Civil Rights, a Boston-based legal group representing the three groups — the Chica Project, the African Community Economic Development of New England and the Greater Boston Latino Network — who filed a federal complaint against Harvard in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision against affirmative action in higher education last month.
“[The Office for Civil Rights] is opening the following issue for investigation: Whether the University discriminates on the basis of race by using donor and legacy preferences in its undergraduate admissions process,” the department wrote in the Monday letter.
According to the initial complaint filed by the groups, so-called “legacy applicants” are six times more likely to be admitted to Harvard’s student body than non-legacy applicants, and those with donor relatives are seven times more likely than those without. The gap makes a big difference at one of the most selective universities in the country, which only accepted 3.4% of applicants for the incoming class of 2027.
An Education Department spokesperson confirmed in a statement that a Title VI investigation of Harvard University was opened, but declined to comment.
Michael Kippins, a litigation fellow for Lawyers for Civil Rights, applauded the department’s decision and called on the Ivy League to join other universities that have ended the practice, like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Johns Hopkins University and the University of California.
“Harvard should follow the lead of a growing number of colleges and universities … and voluntarily abandon these unfair and undeserved practices,” Kippins said in an emailed statement. “Federal anti-discrimination law is clear: federally funded institutions may not utilize unfair and unjustified preferences that harm qualified students of color.”
Legacy admissions came under harsh scrutiny after the Supreme Court gutted the use of affirmative action at Harvard and the University of North Carolina in June, ruling that the race-based policies violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
In a 6-3 ruling, the high court found that the use of affirmative action effectively used race as a negative against certain applicants, particularly white and Asian American students, and thus could not stand.
“University programs must comply with strict scrutiny, they may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and — at some point — they must end,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority opinion.
Activists argued that the Supreme Court’s justification could be applied in much the same way to legacy preferences, which overwhelmingly benefit white students.
Nearly 70% of legacy applicants are white. While many have strong academic and extracurricular activities, the average admitted legacy student is weaker than the average typical student, according to a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The study authors estimated that if Harvard did away with legacy preferences, three-quarters of white legacy applicants would not have been admitted.
Nicole Rura, senior communications officer for Harvard University, said in an email Tuesday that the school is dedicated to welcoming students from all different backgrounds and is reviewing its policies.
"We are in the process of reviewing aspects of our admissions policies to assure compliance with the law and to carry forward Harvard's longstanding commitment to welcoming students of extraordinary talent and promise who come from a wide range of backgrounds, perspectives and life experiences," Rura said.
Follow @Ryan_Knappy
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
