The U.S. Department of Justice says UCLA School of Law intentionally discriminated against white and Asian applicants in admissions for its 2023, 2024 and 2025 entering classes. That is DOJ’s administrative finding, announced October 1, 2026—not a court judgment in the UCLA matter.
What DOJ says it found
In an October 1, 2026 announcement, updated October 2, DOJ’s Civil Rights Division said its compliance review found that UCLA Law used race in admissions in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The finding covers the school’s incoming classes of 2023, 2024 and 2025. DOJ characterized the conduct as intentional discrimination against white and Asian applicants. Read DOJ’s announcement.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The department’s account is an agency conclusion. The materials available here do not establish that a court has considered or ruled on DOJ’s allegations about UCLA Law.
What evidence DOJ cited
DOJ pointed to application materials, staff guidance, recruitment activity and its analysis of admissions outcomes. These descriptions and figures are the department’s account; the underlying applicant-level data were not included in its public announcement.
Essays and applicant guidance
DOJ said that UCLA Law’s post-2023 Supreme Court decision application included personal statements and essay prompts designed to elicit information about applicants’ race. It also said admissions staff instructed applicants on how to disclose their race in those sections.
Recruitment
The department cited race-based recruitment efforts, including UCLA Law’s annual “Diversity Admissions Open House.”
LSAT comparisons
DOJ said it found white and Asian applicants who were rejected despite having LSAT scores matching those of admitted Black and Hispanic applicants. It also reported that, in the 2024 and 2025 classes combined, half of admitted Black applicants had LSAT scores at or below 90% of the admitted white applicants’ scores.
That statistic is DOJ’s characterization of its review, not an independent audit. It does not establish that LSAT score alone determines admission or explain how other application factors were weighed.
Rank #2
How the Supreme Court ruling relates
In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, decided June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court held that the admissions programs before it at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Court explained that admissions programs may not use race in ways that fail strict scrutiny, stereotype applicants, treat race as a negative, or lack a logical endpoint. Read the Court’s opinion.
That case concerned Harvard and UNC, not UCLA Law. DOJ invokes the Supreme Court decision and Title VI as the basis for its conclusion about UCLA. The UCLA-specific conclusion remains DOJ’s administrative finding unless and until resolved through the process it describes or in court.
What happens next
DOJ says it will seek to negotiate a resolution after finding a school out of compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws, which apply to schools receiving federal financial assistance. The department says it may file suit if those efforts fail. Its announcement does not establish whether UCLA responded, whether negotiations took place, or whether a lawsuit was later filed.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon, who leads DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said: “The use of race as a thumb on the scale that helps or disadvantages any student is illegal.” This is Dhillon’s statement of the department’s position, not a judicial ruling on UCLA Law.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
