The whole point of legacy preferences is to attract donations. The schools that have parted ways with it are so loaded that annual gifts from alums don’t really matter now. I do wonder if “development” cases are considered something different from legacy for those schools that no longer give legacy preference - normally a legacy edge is associated with generous giving. Schools also see legacy preference as preserving the culture.

I think most schools esp schools that rely heavily on fundraising and don’t have oversized endowments will be very loathe to give it up if not legally required

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon, I hope, especially if the SC strikes down affirmative action.
Very difficult to rationalize giving a thumb on the scale to children of alumni (who generally skew wealthier and have received more advantages) than to underrepresented minorities.

Last year a lawmaker in NY introduced a bill that would ban legacy preferences at all NY colleges (public and private) but a quick Google search doesn't bring much up, so I guess that's dead or stalled.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S8498

I kind of wonder that if affirmative action is illegal (rather than just not mandated), how it is that legacy admissions (which are also naturally based on origin) are legal? I'd love to hear a lawyer explain that one (clearly I'm not a lawyer).

Because legacy admissions tend to benefit well-off white people. I mean, maybe they'll make up some other rationale, but that's basically it.

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

The school I went to is owned by the alumni corporation, why would they act against their own interests?

It’s not going to survive to pile on more privilege to privileged people in a field where equity is so important. There might be another way around it though that schools are thinking up - like athlete admissions etc.

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

People like the prestige that goes along with being on the same dorm floor as a Kennedy or Biden, or to attend class with Sarah Jessica Parker’s kid, or Bill Gate’s kid. You get it, right?

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

Money
Connections/networking - both for other students and because a well-connected kid has an easier time getting impressive/lucrative jobs
Getting the "right sort" of people
Building brand loyalty in a family of means

Legacies and athletes are more likely to donate. Grads who don’t fall into those categories don’t understand the importance of donating.

Anonymous wrote:Soon, I hope, especially if the SC strikes down affirmative action.
Very difficult to rationalize giving a thumb on the scale to children of alumni (who generally skew wealthier and have received more advantages) than to underrepresented minorities.

Last year a lawmaker in NY introduced a bill that would ban legacy preferences at all NY colleges (public and private) but a quick Google search doesn't bring much up, so I guess that's dead or stalled.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S8498

I kind of wonder that if affirmative action is illegal (rather than just not mandated), how it is that legacy admissions (which are also naturally based on origin) are legal? I'd love to hear a lawyer explain that one (clearly I'm not a lawyer).

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

Once elite colleges stop filling 1/3+ of the class with legacies (they tend to be the children of the uber-wealthy, CEOs, SCOTUS, Senators, celebrities, etc.), the school stops feeling quite so “elite.”

What happens to the buildings that are named after big donors/alumni after their progeny is denied? I guess it would now be easier to rename the buildings if the legacies aren’t there on campus.

Soon, I hope, especially if the SC strikes down affirmative action.
Very difficult to rationalize giving a thumb on the scale to children of alumni (who generally skew wealthier and have received more advantages) than to underrepresented minorities.

Last year a lawmaker in NY introduced a bill that would ban legacy preferences at all NY colleges (public and private) but a quick Google search doesn't bring much up, so I guess that's dead or stalled.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S8498

It'll go away soon followed by racial discrimination practice.

Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

MIT is much more merit based than someplace like HYP, which is more "old white money club", "keep it in the family", legacy. Those schools will never give up legacy.

A few universities do it already (MIT?). It’s not a good look in this era, so only a matter of time.