This editorial board was relatively quick, earlier this month, to commend the leadership of Bates College, Bowdoin College and Colby College for striking the right note in their responses to the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down race-based affirmative action. 

“As resigned and discouraged as critics of the court’s decision may be feeling, there is an element of opportunity here,” we wrote, taking care to call our optimism “cautious.” 

What type of opportunity were we referring to, for the schools?  

The opportunity to devise strategies that could arguably more effectively level the college admissions playing field than affirmative action ever did; the opportunity to bring fresh and urgent attention to the process of making their student bodies less elite, or the opportunity to set new standards for transparency and accountability that befit the mission of schools, like these three, that pledged a strengthened commitment to diversity in response to the Supreme Court ruling. 

Missing in our editorial of July 7 was any reference to the longstanding practice of legacy admissions – where favorable treatment is given to applicants who are the children of alumni – criticism of which has intensified nationally in recent weeks.

According to an article published by the Press Herald on Monday, neither Bates, Bowdoin nor Colby were willing to provide information about their legacy and donor-related admissions practices: “All three declined to provide the acceptance rate for legacy students joining this fall’s freshman class, the percentage of this fall’s legacy students who are expected to pay full tuition, or the racial breakdown of their fall legacy classes.” 

The decision to withhold this information is surprising at best, hypocritical at worst. Whether or not any of these schools is prepared to review its practice of legacy admissions – the “business” value of which is often so great that it can provide grounds for its defense – we believe that commitment to diversity should include commitment to transparency. A case for retaining the practice may be made, but it cannot be credibly made without being straight about the current admissions mix.

The tide of public opinion on legacy admissions appears to be turning.

On July 3, a Boston-based nonprofit, Lawyers for Civil Rights, filed a complaint with the Department of Education alleging that the system of legacy admissions in use at Harvard University violates the Civil Rights Act. “Why are we rewarding children for privileges and advantages accrued by prior generations?” Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, the group’s executive director, said in an interview with the Associated Press. “Your family’s last name and the size of your bank account are not a measure of merit, and should have no bearing on the college admissions process.”

According to a poll of college students and recent graduates released Tuesday, three in four respondents say that taking a student’s “legacy status” into account is unfair.  

Colleges like Bates, Bowdoin and Colby are well aware of the ins and outs of the current cultural moment, and they know how to say the right thing – the content of the statements we praised on July 7 proves that. Whether or not they are willing to end legacy admissions, joining a number of schools around the country that have made that call, is a bigger question for a later date. The question for now was the one the Press Herald asked, and it was not answered.

Hot on the heels of sharp statements outlining strong commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion – commitment that prospective students surely hoped they could take seriously – this is a contradictory approach.