If SU upholds diversity, legacy admissions must fall
To support student journalism and the content you love, become a member of The Daily Orange today.
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the use of race-conscious admissions policies in higher education institutions. Chief Justice John Roberts, who delivered the majority opinion, wrote that affirmative action violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
In the over 40 years since affirmative action was initially deemed lawful by the Supreme Court, universities across the country have used race as a factor for admission to help diversify campuses. At the eight Ivy-League universities alone, the number of nonwhite students increased from 27 percent in 2010 to 35 percent in 2021.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, nine states had already banned race-conscious admissions decisions, implementing alternative diversity-centered programs in affirmative action’s absence.
In California, public universities have spent the last 25 years trying to find successful race-neutral policies, but there are still far fewer Black and Latino students enrolled in the University of California system than before the statewide Affirmative Action ban in 1996. According to a 2020 study conducted by UC Berkeley, the enrollment of Black and Latino students fell by 40 percent at UCLA and UC Berkeley since the ban of affirmative action.
Now, as affirmative action has been struck down, universities across the nation will have to struggle similarly, Syracuse University included. In a statement denouncing the ruling sent to the student body shortly after the ruling, SU administrators emphasized diversity as a tenet of an SU education, citing a history of equal access promotion for people of all backgrounds.
Vice Chancellor Gretchen Ritter said members of the SU community had been working “in anticipation of this case, and are both prepared to make what adjustments we need to our admissions process and any other related processes, for instance, financial aid.” Allen Groves, SU’s Senior Vice President and Chief Student Experience Officer, cited wider geographical outreach and alterations to admissions questions as a means of legally sourcing a diverse class of students.
But when The Daily Orange asked about how SU will handle legacy admits going forward, a disproportionately white and wealthy group nationally, Groves failed to provide a clear answer or even show legitimate consideration of the issue.
“We have not yet considered broader issues in relation to admissions, including legacy admissions,” a separate SU spokesperson told The D.O. after the interview.
Though the university is cognizant of worthwhile alternatives to race-conscious admission policies, failing to alter methods related to legacy admits will harm any attempts to improve, or at the very least maintain, SU’s already lackluster racial demographics.
In the 1920s, top universities first employed use of legacy admissions to keep a high number of Protestant enrollees at top universities. Schools were fearful the number of Jewish, Catholic and Asian students would discourage their usual demographic from attending. Yale is a prime example of an institution still keen on using legacy as a factor in admissions, where admit rates for legacies in the class of 2025 were over triple that of the overall acceptance rate.
A policy with roots so blatantly discriminatory should have no place in the U.S, especially after a ruling supposedly made to protect equality.
Chief Justice John Roberts, in his statement, deemed that past decisions on affirmative action had “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
Maintaining legacy admissions would then suggest the “touchstone” of a student would not be who they are but rather the wealth, name and often race of their predecessors.
While SU has shown they’re looking to bolster all avenues of admissions that may help disenfranchised and nonwhite students, a stronger stance on legacy admissions is required to prove full commitment.
Though countercultural for a usual private institution, SU must make any and all efforts to prevent preferential treatment of wealthy, white students, which is vital to combat the dropoff in racial diversity universities without affirmative action have already seen.
Over a year since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, SCOTUS has dealt numerous decisions which are counterproductive to the progression of equity and access in the U.S. SU and other universities alike now have to fight for their diversity.
The Daily Orange Editorial Board serves as the voice of the organization and aims to contribute the perspectives of students to discussions that concern Syracuse University and the greater Syracuse community. The editorial board’s stances are determined by a majority of its members. You can read more about the editorial board here. Are you interested in pitching a topic for the editorial board to discuss? Email opinion@dailyorange.com.
