Georgetown University’s former president, John J. DeGioia, reportedly flagged 80 students for a special admissions list, allegedly based on their family's wealth and potential donations rather than academic or athletic merit, according to documents in a lawsuit filed against several selective universities, including the University of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The lawsuit claims these universities were expected to be “need blind” in their admissions processes, meaning they should not consider a family’s income when making admissions decisions or determining financial aid. The plaintiffs argue that the schools favored wealthy students, violating provisions of a now-expired law that allowed them to agree on financial aid formulas.
Defendants contend that considering student wealth does not violate the law, which instead prohibits discrimination against economically disadvantaged students needing financial aid. They assert that the plaintiffs are misinterpreting the legal framework.
Documents reveal that at M.I.T., two students recommended by a wealthy banker received preferential treatment, with the admissions director acknowledging that they were not likely to be admitted otherwise. Similarly, at the University of Pennsylvania, students marked as “B.S.I.” (bona fide special interest) had significantly higher admission rates, with former associate dean Sara Harberson stating that these students were often from families that made substantial donations or had connections to the board.
The University of Pennsylvania has denied any merit to the lawsuit, asserting that it does not favor admissions for students based on family donations, emphasizing that only qualified candidates are admitted. M.I.T. echoed this denial, claiming there is no history of wealth favoritism in its admissions process.
The ongoing lawsuit accuses the universities of depriving students of millions in financial aid over two decades, alleging that they violated an antitrust exemption that allowed them to share financial aid methodologies while admitting students without considering individual financial needs. The group of universities has been labeled a “cartel” by the plaintiffs, who argue that this arrangement has led to increased costs for students.
To date, ten of the original 17 universities involved have settled the case, paying a total of $284 million to the plaintiffs, which include former students who received financial aid. Approximately 200,000 students are estimated to have been affected over the past two decades, with some now eligible for reimbursements of up to $2,000 for financial aid they would have otherwise received.
Robert Gilbert, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, stated that newly filed documents demonstrate a consistent pattern of favoring students from affluent backgrounds. The case has been in federal court in Chicago since 2022, with the latest filings providing further insights into the admissions practices of the universities.
According to the lawsuit, a meeting between Dr. DeGioia and a student at an exclusive conference led to her admission after her application had initially been deferred. This incident has raised questions about the influence of personal connections in the admissions process.
In 2020, the University of Pennsylvania withdrew from the group of universities that agreed on standardized financial aid formulas under a 1996 statute allowing such collaboration without antitrust implications, citing a need for greater flexibility in financial aid offerings. The group has since disbanded as the provision allowing information exchange has expired.