CA Governor signs bill to ban all legacy admissions at private CA colleges (USC, Stanford, Santa Clara, etc)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our family is not a big donor, so really no skin in the game. That said, is any one concerned states are overreaching into private schools?

How can a state mandate a private universities admissions process? What’s next? Making private universities be non-religious? Or making sure a private school accepts so many first gen students?

This.

This is huge overreach by the state and social engineering in a private entity.

A private entity that gets tax exemption status and government funds.

The State $ likely follows the student right, not the school.

Just what we need is more government over reach. At some point, they will run out of other peoples' money to spend.

? What does this have to do with "running out of other people's money"?

Those private schools may be "private" but they get direct and indirect government funds. If they don't want to follow the laws that the state imposes, then they can stop getting government funding and tax exemption status.

But, since they do get direct and indirect government funding, they can mandate that they stop using legacy, which is an inherently unfair practice.

[Anonymous]

California should just tie state non-profit status to legacy admissions. No one likes California taxes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.

So all those ̷l̷o̷s̷e̷r̷s̷ people who wear their pizza-stained 30 year old college t-shirts won't donate and will only root for their school on Saturdays? What a bunch of ̷l̷o̷y̷a̷l̷ ̷a̷l̷u̷m̷.̷ losers.

Do you know how much money it takes for a school to take that into consideration for admission? Hundreds of thousands. Most people's giving wasn't doing anything to get their kid in anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.

Ask Amherst. I’ve also been curious about this.

[Anonymous]

unconstitutional. This will be litigated. eventually SCOTUS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Phil Ting for carrying this legislation, CA voters for voting for it, and Gov Newsom for signing it. USC (which has the highest number of legacy admissions, followed by Stanford) said they would comply with the new law.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/30/california-bans-legacy-admissions-colleges-00181655

USC and Stanford will comply.

It will be embarrassing to be the lone private institution in CA not complying with the law.

It is really a stupid law.

No one cares if a walmart grandkid gets a spot as long as the walmart offspring donates a new gym to their alma mater.

Once again, California leads the way on stupid.

The WalMart grandkids are still getting in because of the building donation. Legacy status is irrelevant to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:unconstitutional. This will be litigated. eventually SCOTUS

LOL no self-respecting prestigious college which says they stand for "meritocracy" wants to defend (and disclose bts details of) their legacy admissions policy to SCOTUS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Why would an alumn give money to his/her school if there is no way it will help your child even in some small way don’t the road? Isn’t this going to kill alumni giving?.

Ask Amherst. I’ve also been curious about this.

Okay now I was curious so I went back and looked….Amherst eliminated legacy in 2021
In 2020 annual fund donations were a little over 11M with 44% participation. Looks like FY18 were 10.7M
For FY24, annual fund donations were 9.1M with 35% participation.
So looks like a relatively small decrease — total operating expenses for the year are over 200M so alumni donations seem to be a relatively small percentage (although maybe the big donations go into a different bucket?).
TLDR: the schools have such large endowments that they don’t actually care about the alumni donations that much.

[Anonymous]

I'm fine with banning legacy admissions, but it’s yet another case of the elites making rules they don’t have to live by. He should also ban admissions based on the fame or connections of your parents -how his kids will all gain admission to college.

[Anonymous]

yeah I expect legacy will be done for most US colleges in the next 5 years (maybe except Notre Dame lol).

Go Irish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:unconstitutional. This will be litigated. eventually SCOTUS

LOL no self-respecting prestigious college which says they stand for "meritocracy" wants to defend (and disclose bts details of) their legacy admissions policy to SCOTUS!

Why? We all know they accept high roller legacies with lower standards. It’s not like that’s some big secret.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Phil Ting for carrying this legislation, CA voters for voting for it, and Gov Newsom for signing it. USC (which has the highest number of legacy admissions, followed by Stanford) said they would comply with the new law.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/30/california-bans-legacy-admissions-colleges-00181655

USC and Stanford will comply.

It will be embarrassing to be the lone private institution in CA not complying with the law.

It is really a stupid law.

No one cares if a walmart grandkid gets a spot as long as the walmart offspring donates a new gym to their alma mater.

Once again, California leads the way on stupid.

The WalMart grandkids are still getting in because of the building donation. Legacy status is irrelevant to that.

Regular legacy kids don’t get that much of a boost these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad my kid's first choice/legacy school is in a red state. Doubt legacy admissions will ever be banned there and the school has already doubled down and announced that legacy admissions are staying.

YAY your state's schools will continue to favor less qualified legacies over kids with higher stats. Way to go! Bring on the good old boys network /s

But the stats, the stats, the stats! Thank goodness the stats obsessed do not run our universities. They would be wasteland of one-dimensional strivers with zero social skills or emotional intelligence. Not a campus most vibrant, multi-dimensional kids want to be on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for Phil Ting for carrying this legislation, CA voters for voting for it, and Gov Newsom for signing it. USC (which has the highest number of legacy admissions, followed by Stanford) said they would comply with the new law.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/30/california-bans-legacy-admissions-colleges-00181655

Awesome! So private colleges can be made to toe the line if needed. I wonder why the federal government won't pass laws to clip the wings of the education cartel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Phil Ting for carrying this legislation, CA voters for voting for it, and Gov Newsom for signing it. USC (which has the highest number of legacy admissions, followed by Stanford) said they would comply with the new law.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/30/california-bans-legacy-admissions-colleges-00181655

USC and Stanford will comply.

It will be embarrassing to be the lone private institution in CA not complying with the law.

It is really a stupid law.

No one cares if a walmart grandkid gets a spot as long as the walmart offspring donates a new gym to their alma mater.

Once again, California leads the way on stupid.

The WalMart grandkids are still getting in because of the building donation. Legacy status is irrelevant to that.

The law bans donor precerences as well.