Students overpaid elite colleges $685 million, ‘price-fixing’ suit says
Story by Susan Svrluga, Danielle Douglas-Gabriel (translated using Google Translate)
一份針對美國一些頂尖大學的反壟斷訴訟稱，這些學校在「價格操縱」計劃中向學生多收了 6.85 億美元的費用，引發了人們對其過去的招生和經濟援助政策的嚴重質疑。
喬治城大學、聖母大學、賓州大學、麻省理工學院和其他精英學校官員的文件和證詞表明，儘管他們明確規定錄取學生時不考慮其經濟狀況，但他們似乎更青睞富有的申請者。這種「不考慮需求」的政策允許學校根據聯邦法律在經濟援助方面進行合作，但該案的原告表示，學校考慮學生家庭收入的行為違反了法規。
根據週一晚間向聯邦法院提交的一項動議，喬治城時任校長每年都會根據跟踪名單起草一份約80 名申請人的名單，該名單通常包括有關其父母的財富和過去捐款的信息，但不包括申請人的個人資訊。
訴訟稱，「請承認」經常被寫在名單的頂部——而且幾乎所有申請人都是如此。
前學生指控 17 所精英學校，包括大部分常春藤盟校，串通限制工薪階層和中產階級學生的經濟援助計劃。週一晚上向法院提交的文件中詳細列出了索賠額 6.85 億美元的損失，根據美國反壟斷法，該損失將自動增加兩倍，達到 20 億美元以上。
訴訟中提到的大學否認有不當行為，並尋求駁回此案。他們表示，他們已經花費了數億美元為學生提供經濟援助，有些人最近也大幅擴大了對低收入和中產階級學生的支持。辯方律師對 6.85 億美元的索賠損失估計提出質疑，稱其為「垃圾科學」。他們認為，由於過去 20 年來不同學校的預期家庭貢獻存在很大差異，因此各大學不可能串通使用單一模式。
賓州大學發言人在書面聲明中表示：“賓州大學仍然認為這起訴訟沒有任何法律依據。”他說，原告的主要專家在證詞中承認，佩恩大學並沒有從事原告認為非法的行為。 「該案的實際證據清楚地表明，賓州大學不偏袒那些家庭已向賓州大學捐款或承諾捐款的學生，無論金額多少。事實上，大學採取了非常謹慎的預防措施，以確保不會給予此類優惠。因此，只有合格的候選人才會被錄取。
喬治城大學發言人表示，該大學強烈不同意原告的主張，並將繼續在法庭上積極為自己辯護。梅根·杜比亞克(Meghan Dubyak) 表示：「我們相信，大學的行為是負責任的，其目標始終是只錄取那些能夠在社區中茁壯成長、為社區做出貢獻並進一步加強社區的學生。
由精挑細選的大學組成的聯盟，成立於 20 世紀 90 年代末，被稱為“568 總統集團”，根據 1994 年聯邦反壟斷豁免，合作制定援助方案。此豁免僅適用於學校實施盲目招生的情況。但這些前學生的律師表示，至少有九所大學維持著仍偏向富裕學生的招生政策，違反了 2022 年秋季到期的反壟斷豁免。
同時，根據法庭文件，學校的捐贈總額從 2003 年的約 550 億美元大幅增加到 2022 年的超過 2,200 億美元。
週一該案公佈的細節包括指控麻省理工學院前主席向兩名富有的申請者施加壓力；哈佛大學前官員的證詞稱，該校未加入該組織是因為這將迫使學校減少其經濟援助金額；范德比爾特大學的一位官員在 2014 年寫道，如果該法規到期，學校可能會被迫陷入學生競購戰。
法庭文件稱，聖母大學承認，有時會根據申請人家庭的捐贈歷史或未來能力等因素批准申請人入學。
訴訟稱，在賓州大學，被賦予特殊興趣稱號的申請者——表明他們來自富裕或捐贈家庭——更有可能被錄取。已經'與家庭的經濟狀況無關。根據法庭文件，2020 年，佩恩離開了該組織，以便對學生更加慷慨。
這些指控源自於 2022 年 8 名前學生提起的集體訴訟，他們稱各大學共享計算學生財務需求的方法，從而減少了學校向中低收入學生提供的援助金額。
該訴訟最初指定了16 名被告：耶魯大學、哥倫比亞大學、杜克大學、布朗大學、埃默里大學、喬治城大學、加州理工學院、西北大學、康乃爾大學、達特茅斯學院、賓州大學、范德堡大學、麻省理工學院、聖母大學、萊斯大學和芝加哥大學。後來增加了約翰霍普金斯大學。
訴訟稱，該組織採用的方法在計算淨價時過於強調申請人的支付能力——考慮到助學金、獎學金和稅收抵免後學生支付的費用。訴狀稱，採用這種方法的學校多年來人為地提高了經濟援助接受者的入學淨價格。
該團體在提起訴訟後解散。
其中 10 所學校已達成和解，總金額達 2.84 億美元。這些學校表示，此案沒有法律依據，他們沒有做錯任何事，但他們希望避免進一步昂貴的訴訟。許多人也指出，他們已經花了數億美元為貧困學生提供經濟援助。范德堡大學的發言人指出，去年該校在財政援助上花費了 4.01 億美元。
和解所得收益將匯集起來，向 17 所學校所有受影響的 20 萬名大學部學生提供現金支付，而不僅僅是那些就讀已和解大學的學生。
喬治城大學、賓州大學、加州理工學院、麻省理工學院、康乃爾大學和聖母大學繼續與訴訟作鬥爭。
約翰霍普金斯大學發言人週二表示，該大學正在努力解決此案。
麻省理工學院發言人表示，此案的指控毫無根據。 「麻省理工學院在招生過程中沒有偏向財富的歷史；恰恰相反，」金伯利艾倫在一封電子郵件中寫道。 「經過多年的發現，我們製作了數百萬份文件，這些文件在我們的招生過程中提供了壓倒性的獨立性記錄，原告只能舉出一個例子，其中一名董事會成員的推薦幫助影響了兩名本科申請者的決定。
她說，慈善捐贈的潛力對這些孤立的案例沒有影響，他們的記錄反映出“富人的孩子經常收到來自麻省理工學院的令人失望的消息。”
康乃爾大學和加州理工學院拒絕討論此案。
聖母大學的發言人表示，該大學「相信每一位被聖母大學錄取的學生都完全合格並準備好取得成功。我們仍然認為原告的主張沒有任何依據，我們會讓我們對訴訟的辯護不言而喻。
許多學校長期以來一直宣揚其慷慨的財政援助政策。例如，賓州大學和麻省理工學院自 2008 年以來根據家庭收入提供免費學費，最近還提高了收入門檻以覆蓋更多學生。加州理工學院還為家庭收入低於 10 萬美元的學生提供全額資助，以全額支付學費、雜費、住宿和食物，並為家庭收入低於 20 萬美元的學生提供機構援助，以全額支付學費。絕大多數美國家庭將達到這三所學校的免學費門檻。
麻省理工學院的發言人表示，麻省理工學院的財政援助歷史清楚地表明，財富不是入學的因素。艾倫說，學院今年的財政援助支出為 1.67 億美元，大約 60% 的本科生得到了學校的支持。
喬治城大學今年宣布，已投入 2.85 億美元為大學提供經濟援助，這是有史以來最大的承諾，並且 15% 的新生（263 名學生）有資格獲得佩爾助學金。
2018 年，約翰霍普金斯大學大力推動降低教育成本，億萬富翁邁克布隆伯格 (Mike Bloomberg) 捐贈了 18 億美元用於本科生經濟援助和不考慮需求的招生；今年，我們向醫療和研究生院提供了 10 億美元的財政援助。家庭年收入達 30 萬美元的醫學生無需繳納學費，而且許多人還可以享受生活費和雜費。
原告律師辯稱，在2022 年底總統集團解散後，許多學校在財政援助方面變得更加慷慨。 20% 的機構援助20年來，但選擇限制援助方案。
「我們今天的動議提供了非常充分的證據來支持我們的主張，即被告在經濟援助方面相互勾結了二十年，非法勾結導致被告向學生提供的援助遠遠少於對學生的援助。
A filing in an antitrust lawsuit against some of the nation’s top universities alleges the schools overcharged students by $685 million in a “price-fixing” scheme, raising serious questions about their past admission and financial aid policies.
Documents and testimony from officials at Georgetown University, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Pennsylvania, MIT and other elite schools suggest they appeared to favor wealthy applicants despite their stated policy of accepting students without regard for their financial circumstances. That “need-blind” policy allowed the schools to collaborate on financial aid under federal law, but plaintiffs in the case say the colleges violated the statute by considering students’ family income.
Every year, according to a motion filed in federal court Monday night, Georgetown’s then-president would draw up a list of about 80 applicants based on a tracking list that often included information about their parents’ wealth and past donations, but not the applicants’ transcripts, teacher recommendations or personal essays.
“Please Admit,” was often written at the top of the list, the lawsuit contends — and almost all of the applicants were.
Former students accuse 17 elite schools, including most of the Ivy League, of colluding to limit the financial aid packages of working- and middle-class students. The claimed damages of $685 million, which were detailed in the court filing Monday night, would automatically triple to more than $2 billion under U.S. antitrust laws.
The universities named in the suit have denied wrongdoing and sought to have the case dismissed. They say they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on financial aid for students, and some have recently dramatically expanded their support for low-income and middle-class students. Attorneys for the defense questioned the $685 million estimate of claimed damages, calling it “junk science.” They argued since there was considerable variation in the expected family contribution at the different schools over the last 20 years, the universities could not have colluded to use one singular model.
“Penn continues to see no merit in this lawsuit,” a spokesman for the university said in a written statement. He said the plaintiffs’ main expert conceded in his deposition that Penn did not engage in the conduct the plaintiffs have argued is unlawful. “The actual evidence in the case makes clear that Penn does not favor in admissions students whose families have made or pledged donations to Penn, whatever the amount. In fact, the University takes great precaution to ensure that no such preference is given. As a result, only qualified candidates are admitted.”
A spokeswoman for Georgetown said the university strongly disagrees with the plaintiffs’ claims and will continue to vigorously defend itself in court. “We believe the university has acted responsibly and always with the goal of only admitting students who will thrive in, contribute to and further strengthen our community,” Meghan Dubyak said.
A coalition of highly selective universities, formed in the late 1990s and known as the 568 Presidents Group, collaborated on aid formulas under a 1994 federal antitrust exemption. The exemption applied only if schools engaged in need-blind admissions. But attorneys for the former students say at least nine universities maintained admissions policies that still favored wealthy students in violation of the antitrust exemption, which expired in the fall of 2022.
Meanwhile, according to court documents, the schools’ endowments grew dramatically from a collective total of about $55 billion in 2003 to more than $220 billion in 2022.
Details that emerged in the case Monday included allegations that a former MIT Corporation chair applied pressure for the admission of two wealthy applicants; testimony from a former Harvard official who said the school had not joined the group because it would compel the school to reduce its financial aid awards; and a Vanderbilt University official writing in 2014 that if the statute expired, the school could be forced into a bidding war for students.
The court document contends Notre Dame has admitted that it sometimes granted admission to applicants based on factors that included the donation history, or future capacity, of the applicant’s family.
And at Penn, the suit says, applicants given a special-interest designation — indicating they were from a wealthy or donor family — were more likely to get in. A spokesman for the university said, “Penn’s dean of admissions testified the tag had ‘nothing’ to do with a family’s financial circumstances.” In 2020, Penn left the group to be more generous to students, according to the court filing.
The allegations stem from a class-action lawsuit brought in 2022 by eight former students who said the universities shared a methodology for calculating students’ financial need that reduced the amount of aid the schools provided to low- and middle-income students.
The lawsuit initially named 16 defendants: Yale University, Columbia University, Duke University, Brown University, Emory University, Georgetown, the California Institute of Technology, Northwestern University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Penn, Vanderbilt, MIT, Notre Dame, Rice University and the University of Chicago. Johns Hopkins University was later added.
The lawsuit says the methodology the group employed placed too much emphasis on an applicant’s ability to pay in calculating the net price — what students pay after taking grants, scholarships and tax credits into account. The schools that adopted the approach, the complaint argues, artificially inflated the net price of attendance for financial aid recipients for years.
The group dissolved after the lawsuit was filed.
Ten of the schools have settled, for a total of $284 million. Those schools have said that the case is without merit and they did nothing wrong, but that they wanted to avoid further expensive litigation. Many also noted they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on financial aid for needy students. Last year, a spokesman for Vanderbilt noted, the school spent $401 million on financial aid.
The proceeds from the settlements will be pooled to provide cash payments to the entire class of 200,000 affected undergraduate students at the 17 schools, not just those who attended the universities that have settled.
Georgetown, Penn, Caltech, MIT, Cornell, and Notre Dame continue to fight the lawsuit.
A spokesman for Johns Hopkins said Tuesday that the university is working on a settlement in the case.
A spokeswoman for MIT said the claims in the case are baseless. “MIT has no history of wealth favoritism in its admissions; quite the opposite,” Kimberly Allen wrote in an email. “After years of discovery in which millions of documents were produced that provide an overwhelming record of independence in our admissions process, plaintiffs could cite just a single instance in which the recommendation of a board member helped sway the decisions for two undergraduate applicants.”
The potential for philanthropic gifts had no bearing on these isolated cases, she said, and their records reflect that “the children of wealthy individuals routinely receive disappointing news from MIT.”
Cornell and Caltech declined to discuss the case.
A spokesperson from Notre Dame said the university is “confident that every student admitted to Notre Dame is fully qualified and ready to succeed. We continue to believe that there is no merit to the plaintiffs’ claims, and we will let our defense of the lawsuit speak for itself.”
Many of the schools have long touted their generous financial aid policies. Penn and MIT, for instance, have offered free tuition based on household income since 2008 and recently increased the earnings threshold to cover more students. Caltech also provides grant aid to fully cover tuition, fees, housing and food for students with family incomes of less than $100,000 and institutional aid to fully cover tuition for students with family incomes of less than $200,000. The vast majority of American households would meet the free-tuition thresholds at those three schools.
MIT’s history of financial aid makes clear that wealth is not a factor in admission, the school’s spokeswoman said. The institute spent $167 million this year on financial aid, Allen said, and about 60 percent of their undergraduates get support from the school.
Georgetown announced this year that it has devoted $285 million in university support for financial aid, its largest-ever commitment, and 15 percent of the freshman class — 263 students — are eligible for Pell grants.
Johns Hopkins launched a dramatic push to make its education more affordable in 2018, when a $1.8 billion gift from billionaire Mike Bloomberg went toward undergraduate financial aid and need-blind admissions; this year, a $1 billion gift went to medical and graduate school financial aid. Med students whose families earn up to $300,000 a year pay no tuition, and many have living expenses and fees covered, as well.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs argue that many of these schools became more generous with their financial aid after the Presidents Group disbanded in late 2022. They argue that every school named in the case could have awarded 10 percent to 20 percent more institutional aid from unrestricted endowment funds throughout the 20 years but chose to limit aid packages.
“Our motion today spells out very substantial evidence supporting our claim that the Defendants colluded with each other for twenty years on financial aid, and the illegal collusion resulted in the Defendants providing far less aid to students than would have been provided in a free market,” Robert Gilbert, co-lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a written statement.
At Georgetown, the lawsuit contends, the annual “President’s List” of 80 or so applicants was based on a tracking list of more than 200 names that often included financial information about the parents. The process was explained by the school’s longtime dean of admission in a 2022 deposition given to the Justice Department, according to the court documents.
The filing cited a memo describing a “special interest policy” at Georgetown that would allow “certain well-qualified candidates to be provided favored treatment in admission in exchange for the opportunity the university will have to develop a better association with th[eir] family or sponsor.” The memo also noted the school is “under-funded and under-endowed and we need to do a better job of enlisting the support of America’s wealthiest families and corporations in assisting us. Special interest admits should provide this type of opportunity to enhance and strengthen our future.”
Ted Normand, co-lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a statement that rather than competing based on the aid they could afford to distribute, the schools “saved themselves, and cost their students, hundreds of millions of dollars in aid.”
「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
版主： noles
#3 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
我一直都怀疑你交完need blind financial aid这帮孙子都能看见，所以很多孩子没被藤校录取，不是不优秀，是因为你没钱。
#4 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
可能有，但我倾向于没有。我家老大填申请的时候把SSN写错了。她录取后学校联系我们说你的SSN不对，要我们重新递交SSN,给我们重新估算了FA的数额。老二我们觉得拿不到就没填，录取结束后有的学校催着我们叫FA的申请 
#5 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
想探探你家的经济情况windy 写了： 2024年 12月 22日 17:55 可能有，但我倾向于没有。我家老大填申请的时候把SSN写错了。她录取后学校联系我们说你的SSN不对，要我们重新递交SSN,给我们重新估算了FA的数额。老二我们觉得拿不到就没填，录取结束后有的学校催着我们叫FA的申请
#6 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
有的私立学校肯定是看家庭经济背景来录取。但公开声明need blind的，我觉得还是比较靠谱的。我孩子申请了financial aid。也没影响她被现在的学校录取。她高中今年去的，有两个家里只付大概5千的学费。
#7 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
不过听说布朗这两年FA给太多，财政赤字了
noles 写了： 2024年 12月 23日 08:58 有的私立学校肯定是看家庭经济背景来录取。但公开声明need blind的，我觉得还是比较靠谱的。我孩子申请了financial aid。也没影响她被现在的学校录取。她高中今年去的，有两个家里只付大概5千的学费。
#8 Re: 「價格操縱」訴訟稱學生多付了精英大學 6.85 億美元的費用
对。另外学校在新建一些设施，花不少钱。一个是个医院，一个研究机构，打算大力加强研究投入。所以明年要减少博士生招生。多招硕士生，因为硕士基本上都是自己付费。
本科FA好像不但不减，还要给外国学生FA。今年ED更是招了记录的quest bridge的。