On Sept. 30, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed California bill AB 1780 that prohibits legacy and donor preferences in the admissions process of private institutions.
The decision comes after the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action in higher education in 2023. Schools such as the University of Southern California (USC) and Stanford University were included in this new policy, which aims to promote equity for all applicants, regardless of race or socioeconomic status.
According to NBC News, San Francisco Assemblyman Phil Tang proposed bill AB 1780 following the college scandal of 2019, frequently dubbed the Varsity Blues scandal. The scandal began when law enforcement discovered the “side door” admissions avenue that wealthy families used by paying for their children’s admission into elite universities. This case was a way for Tang to counter the collusive admissions process that had been occurring for decades. The new law ensures that students are being granted admission to top universities based on their personal merit, rather than their familial wealth or ties to an institution, theoretically becoming a more equitable process for all applicants.
“In California, everyone should be able to get ahead through merit, skill and hard work,” Newsom said in a press statement. “The California Dream shouldn’t be accessible to just a lucky few, which is why we’re opening the door to higher education wide enough for everyone, fairly.”
According to the Los Angeles Times, in 2022, over 14% of students enrolled at USC were marked as having some form of relationship with alumni or donors. This statistic is projected to decrease as a result of the new policy.
While this change comes amid the application process for seniors statewide, Marlborough’s College Counseling Department is already working to adapt to these recent changes. Dean of College Counseling Monica DePriest believes that the introduction of this bill will fail to have any significant impact on the admissions process for many students as legacies constitute so little of the decision process.
“Legacy has never been the sole reason that any college would point to as the reason why they would admit a student,” DePriest said. “The student has to be academically prepared and, in the opinion of the ad- mission office, that they could also be a strong contributor to the community in general.”
The repercussions of this policy will affect those applying to college after Sept. 1, 2025, meaning those who are applying during the 2024-25 school year will not be impacted by this decision. Lilly ’26, a current junior planning on applying to college next year shared her thoughts on this new policy.
“I think banning legacy admissions was an important step in creating more equitable college campuses because it will allow students from families who may not have had the same financial and educational support to now have a more equal opportunity to get into an elite school,” Lilly said.
