On: UCLA law school accused by justice department of illegally using race in...
3 October 2026
The law school was accused of considering race. The university denied this, saying it complied with all laws. The denial was not accepted. A second accusation followed the first, concerning the medical school, and the two accusations resemble each other, which suggests a method rather than a coincidence.
I read the procedure carefully. The inquiry begins with an accusation. The accusation is examined by the department that made it. If the examination finds the accusation unfounded, the examination itself may be reviewed, and the review is conducted by the same department, which has already demonstrated its willingness to find accusations. There is no step in this sequence that ends in acquittal, because acquittal would require an authority above the accuser, and the accuser has arranged matters so that no such authority is reachable. The door is not locked. The door stands open, and behind it stands another door, also open, and the applicant is invited, warmly, to proceed.
What troubles me is not the scrutiny itself. An institution may be examined; examination is legitimate. What troubles me is that the criterion is unknowable in advance. The school is told not to consider race. It is also told, implicitly, that if it does not consider race in the correct invisible proportion, it has considered race. Compliance cannot be demonstrated, only suspected. The applicant fills out the form perfectly and is told the form was filled out perfectly, and that this is precisely what a person hiding something would do.
The officials, I note, are courteous. They announce, they invite cooperation, they express confidence that the process will clarify everything. I believe them. The process will clarify everything except the matter itself, which was never its purpose. The purpose of the process is that there be a process, ongoing, well-documented, with each school in turn receiving its visit.
The university will comply. That is the finding. Compliance is the punishment that makes the next inquiry possible.