Scrutiny over university admissions practices is intensifying as the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) targets Duke University with allegations of racial bias. The DOJ claims Duke’s law school has favored applicants from certain racial backgrounds, raising questions about the future of diversity in higher education.
Allegations of Discrimination
The DOJ accuses Duke University’s law school of discriminatory practices in its admissions process, specifically favoring Black and Hispanic candidates over white and Asian applicants. This assertion is part of an ongoing federal investigation into several universities, with Duke being one of the first to see results from these inquiries. According to the DOJ, the law school allegedly used criteria such as first-generation college status and Pell Grant eligibility as indirect ways to achieve racial diversity among its 2023, 2024, and 2025 classes. More on the investigation can be found here.
Response and Concerns
Duke University is currently reviewing the DOJ’s findings and has expressed its commitment to adhering to legal standards while fulfilling its academic goals. The DOJ seeks a settlement to resolve the situation, but there are concerns about the potential consequences of such compliance. Jesse Rothstein, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, notes that fear of government action has already led some universities to pay hefty sums to the federal government. “The threat that underlies the investigation is that the government will find the school is in violation of the Civil Rights Act and will cut off its access to federal financial aid, which could be hugely damaging to a university,” Rothstein explained. More details on similar investigations can be found here.
Previous Adjustments
Duke has previously altered its programs in response to legal pressures. Two years ago, it canceled a scholarship program exclusively for Black students due to the evolving legal environment concerning race-based considerations. Earlier this year, Duke ended its collaboration with an organization supporting doctoral degrees for underrepresented students following an investigation by the Trump administration. Read more about these changes here and here.
National Debate
The Supreme Court’s decision in 2023 to overturn race-conscious admissions has been a pivotal moment for these investigations. Rothstein believes that while universities can consider factors correlated with race, such as socioeconomic status, the DOJ’s interpretation may lead institutions to avoid any practices that could be perceived as discriminatory. This cautious approach could shift the focus of admissions processes towards more quantifiable measures.
Voices and Perspectives
While some, like conservative activist Kenny Xu, advocate for admissions based on quantitative metrics, others caution against using Asian Americans as a political tool. Kenny Xu, who previously served as a spokesperson for Students for Fair Admissions, argues for a balanced admissions approach that considers varying political perspectives. In contrast, Shruti Parikh from North Carolina Asian Americans Together emphasizes the importance of fairness and inclusivity without compromising other communities. Discover more about this debate here.
Amid ongoing investigations into other universities, such as East Carolina University’s Brody School of Medicine, the DOJ continues to push for a voluntary resolution with Duke. If negotiations fail, the department has indicated it may pursue legal action. For further reading on related investigations, click here.
WUNC collaborates with Open Campus for comprehensive coverage of higher education.
