Columbia and Brown to Disclose Admissions and Race Data in Trump Deal
A widely overlooked part of a settlement with the two universities could profoundly alter how elite schools determine who gets accepted.
As part of the settlements struck with two Ivy League universities in recent weeks, the Trump administration will gain access to the standardized test scores and grade point averages of all applicants, including information about their race, a measure that could profoundly alter competitive college admissions.
That aspect of the agreements with
Columbia and
Brown, which goes well beyond the information typically provided to the government, was largely overlooked amid splashier news that the universities had promised to pay tens of millions of dollars to settle claims of violations of federal anti-discrimination laws, including accusations that they had tolerated antisemitism.
The release of such data has been on the wish list of conservatives who are searching for evidence that universities are dodging a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring the consideration of race in college admissions, and will probably be sought in the future from many more of them.
But college officials and experts who support using factors beyond test scores worry that the government — or private groups or individuals — will use the data to file new discrimination charges against universities and threaten their federal funding.
The Trump administration is using every lever it can to push elite college admissions offices toward what it regards as “merit-based” processes that more heavily weigh grades and test scores, arguing that softer measures, such as asking applicants about their life challenges or considering where they live, may be illegal proxies for considering race.
The additional scrutiny is likely to resonate in admissions offices nationwide. It could cause some universities to reconsider techniques like recruitment efforts focused on high schools whose students are predominantly people of color, or accepting students who have outstanding qualifications in some areas but subpar test scores, even if they believe such actions are legal.
“The Trump administration’s ambition here is to send a chill through admissions offices all over the country,” said Justin Driver, a Yale Law School professor who just wrote a book about the Supreme Court and affirmative action and who said he believed that the administration’s understanding of the Supreme Court’s affirmative action decision was wrong. “They are trying to get universities to depress Black and brown enrollment.”
The Trump administration has celebrated getting this data as part of its war on “woke” university policies such as affirmative action and diversity, equity and inclusion programs that it says discriminate based on race.
Because of the Trump administration’s resolution agreement with Brown University, aspiring students will be judged solely on their merits, not their race or sex,” Linda McMahon, the secretary of education, said when the Brown deal was announced, echoing similar comments she had made about Columbia
Woke is officially DEAD at Brown,” President Trump proclaimed on Truth Social in announcing the deal.
The public release of race-related data on admissions could also be valuable to conservative groups who have become the self-appointed enforcers of the Supreme Court decision.
“If this information were obtainable by a Freedom of Information Act request or made public, it would be of great interest,” said Adam Mortara, one of the lawyers for Students for Fair Admissions, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court affirmative action case. “If we could get this and analyze it, we would because we are constantly vigilant and looking out for those who seem not to have gotten the message.”
Columbia and Brown will have to maintain “merit-based admissions policies,” according to their settlements, which codify the administration’s broader aims in legally binding language.
The universities “may not by any means unlawfully preference applicants based on race, color or national origin in admissions throughout its programs,” both agreements state in identical language. “No proxy for racial admission will be tolerated.”
The admissions disclosures will provide the government with data on accepted and rejected applicants broken down by “race, color, grade point average and performance on standardized tests.” While it is not clear what Brown and Columbia’s data will reveal, general data shows that admissions systems that are focused on standardized tests typically help Asian students and harm the chances of Black students.
Of the high school graduates who scored between 1400 and 1600 on the SAT in 2024, the highest possible scores, 1 percent were African American, and 27 percent were Asian, according to
the College Board, the private organization that administers the test. About 12 percent of students taking the test were Black and 10 percent were Asian. Some experts consider the tests to be unfair because there are score gaps by race and class.
Student demographics at Columbia and Brown had already started to shift as the 2023 Supreme Court decision took effect.
Among
first-year undergraduates entering Columbia in fall 2024, 39 percent were Asian and 12 percent were Black. In the fall of 2023, the entering class was 30 percent Asian and 20 percent Black. (White and Hispanic enrollment dropped slightly from 2023 to 2024.)
At
Brown, Asian and white first-year enrollment went up from fall 2023 to fall 2024, while Hispanic and Black enrollment decreased. Not all Ivy League universities, however, showed the same effect.
Be serious. Come the hell on. Even if agree I that lineage-based policy would be more difficult to legally challenge, the VAST MAJORITY of black people are descended from SLAVERY. The play is very obvious and if it isn’t one thing it’ll be another. Let’s not delude ourselves into believing otherwise. This is anti-BLACKNESS/ADOS. Call it what you want.
www.nbcnews.com
