Dear Supporters,
We recently shared the Department of Justice’s findings regarding racial discrimination in admissions at the UCLA School of Medicine. Today, federal investigators delivered another major blow to discriminatory admissions practices in higher education—this time at the University of California San Diego School of Medicine.
In a formal finding released today, the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division determined that UC San Diego Med violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Supreme Court’s landmark 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard.
Connecting the Dots: Why CEO’s Decades of Advocacy Matter Today
This latest enforcement action reinforces what the Center for Equal Opportunity has argued for over thirty years: without rigorous, ongoing oversight, institutions will actively seek workarounds to undermine colorblind equality.
As we noted in our recent update on CEO’s hot streak, this momentum across the UC system and nationwide rests directly on the foundation CEO built:
- Exposing Systemic Reality: Long before federal investigations began, CEO pioneered empirical research examining admissions data at over 80 major universities—including the University of California system—proving that dual-track admissions were standard practice, not isolated accidents.
- Establishing Legal Blueprint: CEO’s extensive studies and amicus filings in SFFA v. Harvard provided the Supreme Court with crucial evidence showing how “diversity” rationales were used to mask raw racial balancing.
- Training Post-SFFA Enforcers: Through our Civil Rights Fellowship, we continue to train attorneys and policy leaders who understand how civil rights laws must be applied—ensuring that federal prohibitions on race discrimination are actively enforced on the ground.
The Big Picture
Institutions can no longer hide behind opaque, “holistic” essay prompts or proxy categories to quietly maintain dual-track admissions systems.
How UC San Diego Skirted the Law
Despite the Supreme Court’s explicit prohibition on race-conscious admissions, DOJ’s investigation revealed that UC San Diego Med created a “shadow application process” using racial proxies:
- Pretextual Hardship Review: Admissions staff were given access to applicant race as part of the hardship review process, which purported to measure how applicants overcame individual obstacles, and instead used this process as a loophole to flag so-called “underrepresented minorities” (URMs) for interview.
- Sorting and Interview Guarantees: Applicants were grouped into subgroups that intentionally elevated URM candidates for interview slots regardless of objective credentials.
- The Result: Qualified white and Asian applicants with higher MCAT scores and GPAs were systematically passed over in favor of lower-credentialed applicants based on race.
As Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon noted in today’s announcement, “San Diego Med’s blatant efforts to prioritize race are illegal, and we will end these practices.”
What Comes Next
DOJ is currently in settlement negotiations with UC San Diego to bring its admissions practices into full legal compliance—and has made clear it will litigate if the school refuses to comply.
Our previous UCLA update showed how federal enforcement follows our long-term strategy, and as federal agencies continue holding universities accountable, CEO will remain on the front lines providing research, legal analysis, and public scrutiny.
Thank you for your unwavering commitment to true equality under the law. None of this sustained pressure would be possible without your support.
Sincerely,
The CEO Team
