In an effort to address perceived inequalities in college admissions, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1780, prohibiting legacy and donor preferences in private college admissions across California, starting with the class of 2026.
California joins four other states in enacting similar measures aimed at increasing diversity and reducing systemic advantages for applicants with family connections to selective institutions. This reflects a broader push for merit-based admissions and greater alignment with California’s commitment to diversity.
But former Princeton University admissions officer Hope Murtaugh isn’t so sure the bill will do what its supporters say it will. Murtaugh said while legacy status often provides an extra boost to already strong applicants, it is not a decisive factor on its own.
“Legacy definitely tips people who were already qualified,” Murtaugh said. “It might be one of those things that makes somebody stand out, but it never lets people get in by itself — never. It’s too competitive for that.”
Murtaugh also said she doesn’t think the policy will increase socioeconomic diversity because most legacy admits are already well-qualified.
“The policy is going to weed out maybe half of the legacy admits,” Murtaugh said. “Those seats would just go to the general applicant pool, and they aren’t going to be limited to lower-income or first-generation students.”
Junior Bela Patel-Meyers, whose mother went to Stanford for her undergraduate degree, said her status as a Stanford legacy has had little influence on her college plans.
“Having a legacy tie doesn’t really make me want to apply there,” Patel-Meyers said. “Honestly, hearing about Stanford from my mom and her sisters, who both work there, doesn’t make me want to apply either.”
However, a junior who requested anonymity because of potential backlash and has legacy connections to Stanford, said they were only going to apply to the university if they had the edge their parents’ and sibling’s connections provided under the current policy.
“The experience of going to Stanford would be very similar to Paly because they are literally right next to each other,” the junior said. “If I didn’t have legacy there, I wouldn’t ever weigh Stanford as a choice.”
One way Murtaugh does see this law making a potential difference is that it may inspire a more widespread shift in college admission policies across the country.
“There are four states that already have this restriction, and I could see it spreading further,” Murtaugh said. “If uber-selective colleges are already denying the majority of alumni children, and it hasn’t hurt their fundraising, then what’s the argument for keeping it?”
