On Monday, the Democratic governor of California enacted a law that stops private nonprofit colleges from using legacy or donor preferences in their admissions processes.

This means that admissions officers at these institutions won’t be allowed to take into account whether a student’s parents attended or contributed financially to the university when making their decisions.

The law, endorsed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, positions California as the second state, following Maryland, to eliminate legacy admissions at private colleges, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. States like Colorado, Virginia, and Illinois have also banned this practice for public institutions. Maryland’s legislation, signed by Gov. Wes Moore in April, includes both public and private colleges. The new California law will affect admissions at some of the wealthiest and most selective private colleges, such as Stanford University and the University of Southern California.

Lawmakers in these states are part of a rising movement that disapproves of legacy and donor preferences, which have traditionally been used by colleges to cultivate alumni networks and generate funding. Opponents argue that these longstanding practices often favor white and affluent candidates. This movement gained momentum following the Supreme Court’s ruling that invalidated race-conscious admissions, which has already led to lower enrollment levels among underrepresented students at several wealthy institutions.

Gov. Newsom expressed, “In California, everyone should have the opportunity to succeed based on merit, talent, and dedication. The California Dream should not only be available to a fortunate few, which is why we are ensuring a fairer access to higher education for everyone.”

While the law clearly aims to eliminate unfair advantages, it lacks robust enforcement measures. Schools failing to comply won’t incur any financial penalties; instead, they are merely obligated to publicly acknowledge when they are not adhering to the law.

Kristen Soares, the president of the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, stated that the institutions represented by her organization will “diligently” aim to meet the law’s compliance deadline in September 2025.

She noted, “As private entities, we are uncomfortable with the state instructing us on admissions practices, and we recognize the precedent this sets. However, we are engaged in discussions surrounding this bill and are committed to ensuring a transparent admission process that is fair for everyone.”

What states might follow suit in banning legacy preferences next? 

This fall, as various colleges assess their enrollment statistics – some attributing declines in campus diversity to the Supreme Court’s decisions – more states are proposing legislation similar to the newly enacted law in California. These efforts, primarily driven by a pushback against the Republican-majority court’s ruling against race-focused admissions, are mainly seen in more liberal states, although surveys indicate there is bipartisan support for the removal of legacy preferences.

The “Fair College Admissions Act,” currently being reviewed in New York’s legislature, aims to stop both public and private colleges from granting preferential admissions to alumni children. According to the bill, schools that do not comply could face fines.

Massachusetts is also considering a similar measure, which was last discussed in a legislative committee in April.