Podcast Summary: Will the End of Affirmative Action Lead to the End of Legacy Admissions?

The Political Scene | The New Yorker
Host: David Remnick
Guests: Miguel Cardona (U.S. Secretary of Education), Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez (VP and Dean of Admissions, Wesleyan University), Jeannie Suk Gerson (Harvard Law Professor)
Date: August 14, 2023

Overview of the Episode's Main Theme

This episode explores the transformative moment facing American higher education after the Supreme Court’s decision to end affirmative action in college admissions. The focus: What will happen to legacy admissions—the controversial practice of giving preference to children of alumni—now that race can no longer be a factor? The discussion features David Remnick with Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona and a deep-dive conversation led by Jeannie Suk Gerson with Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez from Wesleyan University, one of the first selective schools to eliminate legacy preferences.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

The Changing Landscape of College Admissions

[01:17–02:54]

• David Remnick recounts John F. Kennedy’s short and privileged 1935 Harvard essay as an illustration of legacy admissions' history and privilege.
• Harvard and other elite universities have been targeted by lawsuits challenging the fairness of legacy admissions.
• Legislative and policy responses are emerging: Congressional Democrats, some Republicans, and the Biden Administration are scrutinizing legacy admissions.

Secretary Miguel Cardona on the End of Affirmative Action and Legacy Admissions

Context and Response to Affirmative Action Decision
[03:52–04:42]

• Cardona explains the administration isn’t banning legacy admissions per se, but is broadly reevaluating college admissions in light of the Supreme Court ruling.
• There’s a national opportunity to expand pathways to historically underrepresented students.
• Quote:
  “We had work to do to make sure that the diversity on our campus reflects the diversity of our country. So I think it's the time now for leaders in higher education to really put their heads together and chase the ideal.” —Miguel Cardona [04:38]

Government’s Approach and Harvard Investigation
[04:42–06:18]

• The Office for Civil Rights is investigating legacy admissions at Harvard.
• Cardona promises forthcoming guidance on what colleges can lawfully do to promote diversity.

Universities’ Pushback and Underlying Issues
[06:18–08:05]

• Remnick notes that Yale and others argue university autonomy against government intrusion.
• Cardona says some presidents themselves want to end legacy admissions, reasoning: “If race can't be considered, then your last name shouldn’t be the deciding factor either.”
• Cardona calls for a broader rethinking of access, highlighting how too many students are discouraged early by perceived barriers.

Partisanship and Political Challenges
[08:05–09:31]

• Some Republicans, like Tim Scott, echo criticism of legacy admissions, but Cardona doubts genuine bipartisan progress:
  “We’ve gotten nothing but opposition, we’ve gotten nothing but lawsuits to the point where the hypocrisy is so blatant.” —Miguel Cardona [08:47]

Educational Inequality Starts with K–12 and Housing Segregation
[09:31–11:26]

• Remnick observes that school segregation comes from community segregation—a foundational issue pre-dating college admissions.
• Cardona discusses zoning, housing segregation, and the pitfalls of artificially “diverse learning environments” that do not foster genuine integration.

Standardized Testing and Equity
[11:26–13:07]

• Declining influence of the SAT has upsides, since preparation opportunities are unequal:
  “There are some inherent bias in those data... Don't hinge everything on the SATs.” —Miguel Cardona [12:08]
• Cardona outlines federal initiatives to “raise the bar” in K–12, boosting literacy, and supporting college completion.

Alternative Admissions Strategies (Texas Top 10%)
[13:07–14:35]

• Texas's “top 10%” policy is lauded, but Cardona warns not all high schools or K–12 systems are equal, potentially perpetuating inequities unless the broader system is reformed.

International Comparisons and Teacher Investment
[14:35–16:42]

• Other countries view education “as an investment,” prioritizing teacher and professor development—a stark contrast to teachers in the US needing second jobs.
• “If we've normalized in this country that teachers drive Uber on the weekends to make ends meet, we, we failed.” —Miguel Cardona [15:26]
• Cardona suggests the real leverage for improvement is teachers; not everything requires a four-year degree, and technical/career pathways deserve more attention.

Inside Wesleyan’s End to Legacy Admissions: Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez

[16:49–30:27]

Jeannie Suk Gerson interviews Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez about Wesleyan's historic decision.

Personal and Professional Stakes
[17:36–18:06]

• Gonzalez, himself a first-generation, low-income, person of color and Wesleyan alum, supports ending legacy:
  “I want for my children and for others to have complete ownership of their experience, to know that they're there because they deserve to be there, not simply through association.” —Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez [17:39]

Rationale and Financial Fears
[18:25–19:14]

• Gerson asks if eliminating legacy admissions might harm fundraising/donations—a key rationale some colleges cite for maintaining the practice.
• Gonzalez says reactions have been “overwhelmingly positive,” and Wesleyan is betting on values over short-term financial concerns.

Racial Disparity and Legacy
[19:14–19:22]

• Gonzalez acknowledges legacy admissions have “disparate racial impact” due to centuries of exclusion for nonwhite Americans.

Strategy in the New Admissions Era
[19:47–20:46]

• Ending legacy is “both symbolic and potentially substantive.” The school will still see some alumni children, but not with special preference or reserved quotas.

Beyond Legacy: Additional Moves to Foster Diversity
[20:46–22:03]

• Wesleyan's task force addresses the “new reality,” investing in outreach to community-based organizations, veterans, and international scholars.
• Emphasizes broader diversity—not just racial or ethnic, but political, intellectual, geographic, and more.

Avoiding New Barriers in Application Process
[22:03–23:50]

• Wesleyan chooses not to add new supplemental essays, believing required components already allow students to share what’s relevant without imposing an additional burden.

Balancing Admissions Law, Values, and Messaging
[23:50–24:40]

• Gonzalez underlines the challenge: remain compliant with the law while not retreating from a commitment to racial and educational equity and opportunity.

Does the Supreme Court’s Essay “Loophole” Work?
[24:40–25:53]

• Some claim the new rules simply shift race consideration to essays. Gonzalez disagrees:
  “We don't want students to be forced into corners where they feel they have to write about their racial identity... They should not feel that the only way to have that element of their diverse background registered is to be reduced to a single part of the application.” —Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez [25:09]

Holistic Review, Not Just Box-Ticking
[25:53–27:27]

• Understanding a student’s context and character matters more than simply checking a demographic box.

Is There a Model Institution?
[27:27–28:48]

• There’s no perfect “model”; collaboration is legally tricky due to concerns about collusion. Holistic review remains a best practice, but the situation is in flux.

Looking Forward—Will Diversity Decline?
[28:48–30:27]

• Gonzalez is realistic, not optimistic: Based on experiences in states like California, it will be hard to sustain or increase diversity without “very concerted efforts.” The impact of the ruling, compounded by the pandemic and changing applicant behaviors, introduces more uncertainty.

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• “To be a Harvard man is an enviable distinction, and one that I sincerely hope I shall attain.” —Quoting John F. Kennedy’s 1935 Harvard application [01:30]
• “If race can't be considered, then your last name shouldn’t be the deciding factor either.” —Miguel Cardona [07:16]
• “We've gotten nothing but opposition, we've gotten nothing but lawsuits to the point where the hypocrisy is so blatant.” —Miguel Cardona [08:47]
• “If we've normalized in this country that teachers drive Uber on the weekends to make ends meet, we, we failed.” —Miguel Cardona [15:26]
• “I think it'd be hard to argue [legacy admissions] didn’t [have a disparate racial impact], just given demographics. You're talking about, in some cases, centuries of access and opportunity for white Americans.” —Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez [19:22]
• “Admission is more art than science...understanding that there might be things that impact access opportunities, things of that sort that are...related to...race, ethnicity, and community...are contextual considerations.” —Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez [26:25]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 01:17 — David Remnick introduces legacy admissions via JFK’s Harvard essay.
• 03:52 — Secretary Cardona on reevaluating admissions after SCOTUS ruling.
• 06:56 — Cardona on university autonomy, legacy, and broader access.
• 08:05 — Discussion on partisanship and legacy reforms.
• 09:31 — Segregation’s roots in K–12, the housing divide.
• 11:26 — SAT/standardized testing debate and equity concerns.
• 13:07 — Texas “top 10%” plan and its complexities.
• 14:52 — Looking overseas for educational models; teacher pay/investment.
• 17:36 — Amin Abdul-Malik Gonzalez introduces Wesleyan’s stance.
• 18:25 — Fundraising concern and legacy’s impact.
• 19:14 — Racial dimension of legacy admissions.
• 20:17 — Next steps: Outreach, transferring, international scholars.
• 22:03 — Avoiding supplemental essays; minimizing application barriers.
• 24:40 — The “essay loophole” and student agency.
• 26:25 — Holistic review and context over checkboxes.
• 28:48 — Realistic outlook: The challenge of maintaining diversity post-decisions.

Conclusion

This episode presents a critical moment for college admissions reform amid heightened scrutiny of legacy preferences and post-affirmative action uncertainty. It combines high-level policy analysis with practical perspectives from admissions officers, laying bare the systemic, political, and personal stakes in building fairer pathways to higher education. The conversation recognizes both the limitations and the opportunities now facing American colleges, and urges a commitment to holistic, equitable reform even without the formal tools of affirmative action.