The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally accused the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law (UCLA Law) of discriminating against white and Asian applicants in its admissions process beginning in 2023. The DOJ alleges that UCLA Law's practices violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and are inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which barred the use of race as a factor in college admissions.
Explainer Religious Equality and Civil Rights: Examining Government Favoritism and the Law
The dispute has placed UCLA Law at the center of a national debate over fairness, diversity, and the future of affirmative action in higher education. The DOJ’s investigation and subsequent allegations have intensified scrutiny of how selective universities evaluate applicants and whether their practices comply with federal law following the Supreme Court’s ruling.
DOJ’s Allegations and Evidence
According to a letter sent by the DOJ to UCLA Law, the department asserts that the law school "intentionally discriminated on the basis of race" during its admissions process. The DOJ’s findings are based on data from the 2024 and 2025 admissions cycles. The department claims that white and Asian applicants with Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores comparable to, or even higher than, those of admitted Black and Hispanic applicants were rejected at higher rates.
Specifically, the DOJ cited statistics indicating that half of the Black applicants admitted to UCLA Law had LSAT scores at or below the 90th percentile of scores among admitted white applicants. The department further alleged that some white and Asian applicants with lower LSAT scores than admitted Black and Hispanic applicants would have been admitted if they had belonged to those racial groups. DOJ officials described UCLA Law’s approach as a "two-tiered admissions system whose academic bar for acceptance shifts up or down depending on the color of your skin."
Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Civil Rights Division, stated, "The use of race as a thumb on the scale that helps or disadvantages any student is illegal." The DOJ maintains that any consideration of race that results in a disadvantage or advantage for an applicant violates federal law, particularly after the Supreme Court’s decision.
In response to its findings, the DOJ has offered to enter into a voluntary resolution agreement with UCLA Law. The goal, according to the department, is to "ensure that admissions practices are brought into legal compliance" and to avoid further legal action if possible.
UCLA Law’s Response
UCLA Law has firmly denied the DOJ’s allegations. In a statement provided by Orli Belman, assistant dean of communications, the law school emphasized that its admissions process is both comprehensive and merit-based. "Students are admitted through a comprehensive, merit-based review process that considers each applicant’s achievements and experiences. We are confident in our process," the statement read.
The school also underscored its commitment to following both state and federal law in all admissions decisions. UCLA Law did not indicate whether it would accept the DOJ’s offer to resolve the matter voluntarily, nor did it provide details on any potential changes to its admissions policies in light of the DOJ’s findings.
Broader Context and Next Steps
The DOJ’s action against UCLA Law comes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which prohibited the explicit consideration of race in college and university admissions. That ruling has prompted federal authorities to examine admissions processes at selective universities nationwide, seeking to ensure compliance with the new legal landscape.
The Justice Department has not announced any additional enforcement actions against other universities at this time. However, officials have stated their intent to resolve the UCLA Law matter through a voluntary agreement, if possible. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for how public universities across the country structure their admissions processes, particularly as institutions seek to balance diversity goals with legal requirements.
The situation remains fluid, and it is unclear whether UCLA Law will agree to the DOJ’s proposed resolution or if further legal proceedings will follow. The case is being closely watched by higher education leaders, civil rights advocates, and policymakers, as it may set a precedent for future admissions practices in the post-affirmative action era.
For more information, the DOJ’s letter to UCLA Law is available online.
