University of Texas System Accused of Racial Discrimination in Admissions
A nonprofit organization released a report on Tuesday claiming that the University of Texas System still discriminates based on race, despite a recent Supreme Court ruling against such practices.
The report, from De No Harm, analyzed admissions at seven medical schools in the university system, urging officials to cease withholding information about racial preferences. An earlier study from the group indicated that acceptance rates remained relatively unchanged among racial groups following the Supreme Court’s landmark affirmative action ruling in 2023, while test data still exhibited racial disparities.
David Pueltz, a statistician and professor at the University of Texas, authored a report titled “Racial Preferences at Texas Medical Colleges.” He noted that prior to the court’s ruling, applicants in the University of Texas System were often treated differently based on their race. For instance, at UT Southwestern, Black applicants were reportedly “21 times more likely” to be accepted compared to white applicants with similar academic qualifications.
This study provides a statistical examination of admissions data from the Texas Tech University Health Science Center School of Medicine for the 2021 and 2022 admission cycles.
In the 2023 Fair Admissions Students v. Harvard University case, a six-judge majority found that race-based college admissions practices violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The Do No Harm report states that its findings “document the types of race-based preferences.” It aims to evaluate whether admissions practices have shifted since the ruling was established.
“The University of Texas System’s silence is striking. Dr. Pueltz’s detailed analysis reveals that before the Fair Admissions decision, Texas Medical School significantly discriminated against white and Asian applicants, and those race-conscious practices seem to persist,” said Ian Kingsbury, senior director at the Do No Harm Medical Accountability Center.
He added, “This raises questions about whether the brand has continued or just been rebranded to maintain racial favoritism.”
Kingsbury also questioned why UT School of Medicine would deny public records requests for post-SFFA admissions data if they are compliant with federal law. He expressed intentions to pursue various avenues—legal, legislative, or public—to ensure compliance with the Supreme Court ruling.
The report further indicated that Black and Hispanic applicants were admitted more frequently than white and Asian candidates who had comparable academic credentials, indicating a preference system divided by race.
“If admissions were based solely on academic merit, the acceptance rates should be equal across races,” the report observed.
Stanley Goldfarb, MD, president of Do No Harm, commented, “Many medical schools continue to embrace identity politics and maintain discriminatory admissions policies. These practices have been deemed illegal by the Supreme Court, and schools seem to be shirking their responsibility to train the most capable future medical professionals. We will persist in filing complaints and lawsuits to restore merit in medical education.”
Seven medical schools within the University of Texas System did not provide admissions data, including UT Southwestern Medical School and UT Austin Dell Medical School, among others.
Do No Harm advocates against ideological threats in healthcare, opposing the influence of identity politics in both medical research and practice. The organization has released previous reports highlighting the rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion requirements in medical associations, emphasizing ongoing racial issues in healthcare.
