California lawmakers recently passed a groundbreaking bill that prohibits private colleges and universities from considering an applicant’s legacy or donor connections during the admissions process. This legislation, one of the first of its kind, is designed to strengthen equitable access to higher education by eliminating admissions preferences for students from wealthy or influential families. The move aligns with a broader trend in the United States to make college admissions fairer, especially in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that race-based affirmative action is unconstitutional.
While the bill, known as AB1780 and authored by Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), is a significant step toward promoting fairness in higher education, it was stripped of its original provisions that would have imposed strict financial penalties on institutions that violated the law. Instead, the measure requires private universities, including prominent institutions like the University of Southern California (USC) and Stanford University, to submit an annual report to the state. These reports must disclose the number of admitted students who received preferences due to their status as children of alumni or donors.
LEGACY ADMISSIONS: PEER PRESSURE & ACCOUNTABILITY
This shift from financial penalties to mandatory transparency reflects a compromise in the legislative process, but it also suggests that the effectiveness of the bill will rely more on public accountability and peer pressure than on legal repercussions.
The legislation affects a small but significant number of California’s most selective private schools that continue to consider legacy and donor connections in their admissions processes. According to a 2019 state law, also authored by Ting and spurred by the Varsity Blues scandal, universities were required to provide annual reports on legacy or donor admissions. That law, however, expired in 2023. Under the previous law, USC reported that 1,791 undergraduate applicants admitted in 2023—approximately 14.5% of the admitted class—had ties to alumni or donors. Stanford reported a similar percentage, with 295 admitted students, or about 13.6% of their incoming class, benefiting from such preferences.
The push to eliminate legacy and donor preferences has gained momentum in recent years, particularly after the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down race-based affirmative action. The ruling has led to renewed scrutiny of other forms of preferential treatment in college admissions, with many advocates arguing that legacy admissions are just as discriminatory as affirmative action policies. In response, several states have taken steps to ban or restrict legacy preferences in public higher education institutions. Maryland and Virginia, for example, both banned legacy admissions in public universities earlier this year, while Colorado became the first state to do so in 2020.
Despite the growing opposition to legacy admissions, the practice remains deeply ingrained in many private colleges and universities. Institutions often defend the practice by arguing that legacy preferences help foster strong alumni relations and encourage donations, which in turn support scholarships, facilities, and other resources that benefit all students. However, these arguments are increasingly being challenged by those who believe that merit should be the sole criterion for college admissions.
The impact of this legislation on legacy and donor admissions remains to be seen. Without financial penalties, some critics argue that the law may not be strong enough to compel significant change. However, Top Tier Admissions predicts that peer pressure and the drive for transparency will play a crucial role in shaping how institutions respond. As more states adopt similar measures and as public scrutiny of legacy and donor admissions intensifies, prestigious schools like USC and Stanford may find themselves increasingly compelled to align with broader trends in higher education that prioritize equity. It’s worth noting, however, that legacy applicants are not a monolithic group. Given how much top colleges have diversified their communities over the last 20+ years, legacy applicants are also a more diverse cohort than ever before.
Moreover, the requirement for annual reporting could lead to greater accountability, as institutions will be forced to publicly disclose the extent to which they rely on legacy and donor preferences. This transparency could, in turn, spur further legislative action or even voluntary reforms by the institutions themselves.
While the absence of financial penalties may limit the immediate impact of California’s new law, the pressure to conform to evolving norms in college admissions may ultimately drive significant changes. The coming years will be critical in determining whether this legislation can achieve its goal.
If you enjoyed this post, follow us on Instagram @toptieradmissions for more tips and subscribe to our blog for expert insights & college admissions news!
- College Planning Is an Investment Strategy: Savvy Families Start Early - October 23, 2025
- Helping Without Hovering: Building Emotional Resilience - July 24, 2025
- How “Grandma” Hobbies Can Boost Your Admissions Odds - June 9, 2025
