Assessing the College Admissions Landscape Post-Affirmative Action
September 4, 2025
Diversity is once again the buzzword of the moment. But unlike the past fifteen years鈥攁 veritable golden age of diversity efforts across industries and throughout popular culture, which saw its peak in 2020 and 2021鈥攖he word (and its cousins: equity, inclusion, multiculturalism, and accessibility) has been assigned a stigma so pronounced that institutions and organizations have now begun to strike it from their department names, job titles, and website verbiage, out of fear of the legal and financial consequences. Nowhere has this shift been more apparent than in higher education.
Over the past two years, we have witnessed an ongoing overhaul in federal and state regulations surrounding diversity initiatives in higher education. These changes have had and will continue to have an effect on all aspects of student experience, from their decision to apply to their ability to graduate鈥攁nd quite nearly everything in between. At 国产第一福利影院草草, we are paying particular attention to the admissions process, and closely monitoring how colleges are actually shaping their classes in light of these changes.
But with new developments seemingly every week, and a new admissions window just a few months away, it can be difficult for individual students and families to gauge where to look, what to pay attention to, and what to prepare for. Below, we鈥檒l address some of the most pressing questions about the evolving landscape of college admissions:
What is the admissions landscape, post-affirmative action?
In the 2023 landmark Supreme Court case (and its companion case SFFA v. UNC), the court overturned the prior precedent that established race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Because this decision happened so recently, there has been only one full admissions cycle (2024-2025) under the new race-neutral precedent. This means that there is very as to how SFFA is actually impacting college admissions. Additionally, individual colleges already have incentive to keep their idiosyncratic admissions procedures under wraps, and following the decision, they may be even less inclined to disclose that specific procedural information.
What we do know is that there was considerable variation from school to school, as far as shifts in new student demographics following the decision. A from College Board鈥檚 Admissions Research Consortium found that more selective private institutions were most likely to see a dip in underrepresented racial minority student enrollment.
However, since there has only been one complete admissions cycle of data, it鈥檚 not yet possible to deduce whether these changes are part of a larger trend. On top of this, with the gradual dismantling of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives across the country, our ability to glean the effects of any one change will be near impossible. It鈥檚 safe to say that these changes in precedent and policy will have an impact on college admissions, but it will take time to get a clear picture of those impacts, and it will likely vary from state to state and institution to institution.
What is happening to DEI on a state and federal level?
Since President Trump took office in January, he has released a flurry of executive orders taking aim at Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the and its departments, and in the , including higher education. Executive orders cannot create new laws, but they can provide legal directives for how federal agencies should implement and enforce laws. In the case of these DEI-related executive orders, the president is invoking existing civil rights law to claim that institutions cannot 鈥渁dvantage鈥� certain demographics over others in the name of DEI.
Additional guidance documents regarding DEI have come out over the course of the year, from to . These, like executive orders, are not legally binding and can be challenged and overturned by the courts. This is what happened in August, when a federal judge struck down a February 14th 鈥淒ear Colleague鈥� letter. This letter advised educational institutions to comply with the administration鈥檚 interpretation of civil rights law or face a potential loss of federal funding. The judge found that the letter was attempting to impose new legal obligations on schools, rather than simply clarifying existing law.
Before President Trump took office, there were already various state-level proposals in the works for limiting or eliminating DEI efforts, and many of these have taken effect over the past year, which has exacerbated the reach of the federal government鈥檚 stance on DEI. Seventeen states have passed laws regarding DEI, and another dozen have proposed legislation under consideration. Unlike executive orders and guidance documents, these are new state-level laws, and create new legal obligations for colleges, universities, and their employees. The Chronicle of Higher Education has been by state and by institution, and posts live updates as those changes go into effect.
Individual colleges and universities across the country have also made changes in response to state law and federal recommendations. The majority of university-level changes have been to the departments and offices that house DEI and multicultural initiatives.
Here are some examples of the changes individual universities have taken:
- Changing the names of their DEI offices to be more 鈥渘eutral鈥� (this is the most widespread change on an institutional level)
- Removing certain language, such as 鈥渄iversity,鈥� 鈥渆quity,鈥� 鈥渋nclusion,鈥� and other related words, from websites, communications, and job descriptions
- Cutting minority-focused scholarships and programs
- Eliminating the use of diversity statements in faculty hiring and admissions
- Banning mandatory DEI training
- Reassigning or eliminating staff positions
- Disbanding DEI departments altogether
How could these DEI bans impact admissions decisions?
Both state law and federal pressure have influenced university policy around DEI and diversity-related issues. There is no easy way to measure the direct statistical impact this will have on admissions decisions, since there is such variation by state and institution. But even so, it is clear that there will be impacts to the overall admissions landscape and to individual student and family decision-making.
With the elimination of many minority-focused scholarships and programs, certain applicants will face a more limited array of financial aid options and academic tracks than they might have had in the past. Additionally, the phasing out of 鈥渄iversity statements鈥� in some schools鈥� supplemental applications might have an impact on how applicants write about themselves. While this change won鈥檛 entirely eliminate students鈥� ability to discuss their lived experience (this can be done in other ways, including in the Common App essay), it is possible that the cultural and policy shifts might make students more hesitant to share certain personal stories in their applications. There is no foolproof way to predict the success of one essay topic over another in an individual student鈥檚 application, but any move away from the specific and into the generic is likely to have an adverse effect on application success. For more about how to navigate diversity essays, check out our blog How Diversity Essay Prompts Are Changing in 2025 鈥� And What That Means for You.
Preceding the admissions decisions themselves, another trend to look out for could be a shift in where certain demographics of students are applying or not applying. There is no clear data right now about whether or how DEI restrictions impact student enrollment, but one of college students found that more than half would consider transferring if their institution were to eliminate DEI programs, and an even higher percentage say a lack of DEI would鈥檝e impacted their decision to enroll. Any demographic trends in student enrollment that arise over the next several application cycles could reflect a shift in admissions decisions, but it could also reflect a shift in applicant pools as some students self-select away from applying to schools with limited DEI resources.
What else is at stake with these changes to DEI?
Beyond admissions and enrollment itself, what do current and prospective students face in a DEI-restricted state or university? At many schools, there will be far fewer campus resources for students of various backgrounds, including community-building programs, scholarships, peer support, and mentorship opportunities. On the other hand, students may find that some schools have made superficial changes to comply with state law or federal recommendations (such as renaming offices or job titles), but that staff are still striving to provide similar offerings wherever possible.
While these new laws and federal orders are not (explicitly) intended to limit the free speech of individuals, they are likely to have a chilling effect anyway. Uncertainty about implementation and worries about retaliation may cause faculty to change their courses and staff to limit their departments鈥� offerings. Students may feel increased pressure to censor themselves in class, have more difficulty finding community, and struggle with mental health due to shifting university, state, and national policy.
There鈥檚 no telling how deep or lasting of an impact these changes to DEI will have on higher education and the country as a whole. The next administration may very well shift us back in the opposite direction. But in the meantime, current and prospective college students鈥攅specially racial and ethnic minority students, and queer and trans students鈥攈ave a significantly changed landscape to contend with. We encourage current students to research the specific restrictions in their state and at their university, and we encourage prospective students to carefully consider these policy changes as they put together their college application lists.
Further Resources:
