LA SHAWN BARBER COMMENTARY: Ban Legacy Preferences

Asserts the conservative blogger, over at the American Civil Rights Institute blog: "Inside Higher Ed briefly reviews the legal arguments against legacy preferences. Lawyers cite the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which some contend bars legacy admissions at government and private institutions. Specifically, the law states that all citizens have the same rights. Implicitly, the government is barred from conferring so-called hereditary rights. The post-Civil War legislation was enacted to prevent Southerners from discriminating against newly freed slaves based on heredity. Other legal experts say the Constitution bars legacy preferences only at government institutions. Private institutions may legally use them, just as private institutions may continue factoring race into admissions decisions. The point, which shouldn’t be understated, is that the government may not treat citizens differently based on race."

She continues: "An argument against legacy (hereditary) preferences can be made under Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution, which reads: 'No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.' Some schools may be concerned that without legacy admissions, alumni support might decrease. That’s a possibility. Money is a strong motivator, and people expect their giving to benefit them and/or their progeny in some way."

More commentary from Ms. Barber: "If we want to be consistent in our arguments against skin color preferences, we must oppose legacy preferences for the same reasons. No individual should be discriminated against or granted preferences based on factors like race, sex, or whether his father graduated from the school and contributes a boatload of money every year."