The University of California, Berkeley, School of Law discriminated against white and Asian applicants, the Trump administration said Wednesday, accusing the school of using admissions essays and other practices to favor applicants based on race.
A joint Justice Department and Education Department investigation concluded that Berkeley Law violated federal civil rights law and the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against race-based college admissions. The university disputed the findings, saying its admissions process complies with the law.
“Berkeley Law School’s deliberate efforts to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision in SFFA demonstrate a complete disregard for the rule of law,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a statement announcing the findings. “The Department will continue to aggressively pursue compliance from schools who attempt to racially manipulate their student bodies in violation of federal law.”
Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky said the school does not consider race in admissions “in any way.”
“Federal statutes and the Supreme Court’s decisions do not preclude schools from pursuing diversity so long as they give no preferences based on race,” Chemerinsky said. “Berkeley Law does not do so.”
The findings open the door to settlement negotiations and further enforcement. The DOJ said it would sue if negotiations failed to bring the school into compliance.
In its findings letter, the department said the discrimination affected at least the incoming classes of 2024 and 2025. It also accused the school of refusing to provide information requested during the investigation.
Investigators cited admissions data that they said showed preferences for black applicants over similarly qualified white and Asian applicants. The department said its analysis found that black applicants had 5.8 times the odds of admission as comparable white applicants in 2025.
The government also accused Berkeley Law of asking applicants to identify their race so admitted students could be grouped with classmates sharing the same primary identity. The department characterized the practice as intentionally separating students by race.
Berkeley’s published application instructions ask prospective students to explain how their backgrounds and experiences would contribute to the school. The instructions list race and ethnicity among several characteristics applicants have discussed, alongside socioeconomic background, geographic diversity, and being the first in their families to attend college.
The dispute turns in part on the distinction between considering an applicant’s experiences and awarding a preference based on race.
The Supreme Court’s 2023 decision striking down admissions programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina barred racial preferences. But the court also said universities could consider applicants’ accounts of how race affected their lives, provided they evaluated individual experiences rather than race itself.
In its findings letter, the department notably pointed out that California voters prohibited racial preferences in public education through a 1996 ballot measure, placing the state’s public universities under restrictions that long predated the Supreme Court’s ruling against affirmative action.
DOJ INVESTIGATING WILLIAM AND MARY FOR POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
The DOJ pointed to differences in admitted students’ Law School Admission Test scores as evidence supporting its findings. Across 2024 and 2025, half of admitted black applicants scored below 95% of admitted white applicants, the department said. It added that 37% of admitted black applicants scored below 99% of admitted white applicants. Investigators cited those gaps as evidence that the school applied different admissions standards based on race.
“Title VI is clear: no student should be advantaged or disadvantaged in admissions because of the color of their skin,” Education Department Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey said. “The Supreme Court made equally clear that universities cannot evade the law by finding new ways to make race a factor in admissions decisions.”