In 2024, three students filed a class-action lawsuit against the University of Oklahoma, alleging the school had illegally based financial aid decisions on students’ race.
OU sought to have the lawsuit dismissed based on procedural grounds. University officials argued that the students’ lacked standing to sue and that the university is legally protected from lawsuits since it is an “arm of the State.”
But on Sept. 25, U.S. District Judge Patrick Wyrick rejected OU’s motion. The lawsuit may proceed. If OU wants to win, the university must demonstrate that it did not engage in illegal discrimination.
That’s how it should be. Questions this important should not go unanswered.
In their complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that “racial preferences continue to exist at the University of Oklahoma” despite prior court rulings, including a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that outlawed the use of race in college admissions.
As evidence of illegal racial discrimination, the plaintiffs’ complaint cited a statistical analysis of publicly available data that “indicates that the University of Oklahoma considers race when awarding financial aid to its students.”
The analysis found that black students were given greater amounts of scholarship aid than similarly situated non-black students, meaning two students from similar economic and social backgrounds received different scholarships based solely on race.
“Based on the University of Oklahoma’s published enrollment data and the financial-aid data that it reported to the Department of Education from 2009 to 2022, statistical analysis shows that black students receive more institutional grant aid from the University of Oklahoma than other students, even when controlling to the extent possible for factors such as family income,” the complaint stated.
Furthermore, the complaint stated that an “official from the University of Oklahoma’s Office of Admissions” told one plaintiff “that financial aid was generally not available to students like her but would have been if she were African American.”
Wyrick noted that OU officials sought to have the case dismissed based on jurisdictional grounds and not because OU introduced “evidence disputing” the plaintiffs’ allegations.
“The Court therefore accepts the well-pleaded factual allegations as true in determining whether Plaintiffs sufficiently allege standing,” Wyrick wrote.
The basic principle driving this lawsuit is simple: If two students come from similar economic backgrounds and have similar academic records, and the only real difference between the two is racial background, then the two students should receive similar levels of financial aid.
Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs General Counsel Ryan Haynie is local counsel for the lawsuit, so the organization I lead clearly believes this case deserves a fair hearing. Oklahomans who care about preserving a colorblind society can be glad we will get one.
Jonathan Small serves as president of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (www.ocpathink.org).