iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
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. The finding, announced October 1, 2026, is the department’s administrative conclusion—not a court judgment in a case against UCLA Law.
What did the Justice Department find?
DOJ’s Civil Rights Division said its compliance review found that UCLA Law used race in admissions in a way that violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The finding covers applicants to the school’s incoming classes in 2023, 2024 and 2025. DOJ said the conduct discriminated against white and Asian applicants. DOJ announced the finding on October 1, 2026.
This is the department’s enforcement finding. The available announcement does not establish that a court has ruled on UCLA Law’s conduct, and it does not report a final resolution.
What evidence did DOJ cite?
Application essays and applicant guidance
DOJ said UCLA Law’s post-2023 application included personal statements and essay prompts designed to elicit information about applicants’ race. The department also said admissions staff told applicants how to disclose their race in those sections. These are DOJ’s descriptions of the application and staff guidance.
Recruitment efforts
The department cited race-based recruitment efforts, including UCLA Law’s annual “Diversity Admissions Open House.” The announcement presents this as part of DOJ’s basis for its finding.
LSAT-score comparisons
DOJ said it found white and Asian applicants who were rejected despite having LSAT scores that matched 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.
Those figures are DOJ’s characterization of its review, not an independent audit presented in the announcement. The announcement does not include the underlying applicant-level data. The comparison also does not establish that LSAT score alone determines admission; it describes one factor DOJ said it examined.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →How does the Supreme Court ruling apply?
DOJ grounded its UCLA conclusion in Title VI and the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA). The Court decided SFFA on June 29, 2023, holding that the admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina then before it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Supreme Court’s opinion explains that race-conscious admissions must satisfy strict scrutiny and may not stereotype applicants, treat race as a negative, or lack a logical endpoint.
Rank #2
The Supreme Court case concerned Harvard and UNC, not UCLA Law. DOJ is applying its interpretation of that precedent and Title VI to UCLA Law’s admissions practices. Its conclusion about UCLA remains an agency finding unless and until it is resolved through enforcement or a court proceeding.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What happens next?
DOJ said schools receiving federal financial assistance are covered by federal nondiscrimination laws. The department’s announcement says it will seek to negotiate a resolution to bring a school into compliance after finding a violation, and that it may file suit if those efforts fail.
The October 1 announcement, updated October 2, does not establish whether UCLA responded, whether negotiations took place, or whether a lawsuit was subsequently filed. It therefore does not show a final outcome.
What DOJ says its position means
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.” That is Dhillon’s statement of the department’s position, not a judicial ruling about 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.
