Class action lawsuit filed against 32 universities, all students admitted since 2021 named as potential members
The lawsuit argues that the institutions colluded to limit competition between each other by sharing lists of students committed to enroll.
Plaintiffs say the colleges' alleged arrangement raises tuition for all students admitted to the schools.
A massive federal class action lawsuit has been filed in Massachusetts, targeting 32 elite universities over allegations that their Early Decision admissions programs violate federal antitrust law.
The case names all students admitted to these institutions since August 2021 as potential class members.
The complaint argues that these institutions colluded to limit competition for Early Decision applicants by sharing lists of students who had committed to enroll. By doing so, the plaintiffs claim, the universities effectively agreed not to compete for those students with better financial aid packages or merit scholarships, removing one of the last competitive checks on soaring tuition prices.
Early Decision is a binding admissions process in which students apply and commit to attend before receiving offers from other universities. While colleges often tout this system as a way for students to signal strong interest, critics have long argued it benefits wealthier families who can commit without weighing cost and pressures price-sensitive students into a choice that locks them out of comparing aid packages. According to the lawsuit, these admissions pools often have significantly higher acceptance rates than regular decision, further pushing students toward Early Decision regardless of financial concerns.
The plaintiffs say this arrangement not only raises tuition for Early Decision students but drives up prices for all students, including those admitted through regular decision.
Because universities know they will fill a large share of their classes with applicants who have already committed, the lawsuit claims, they have no incentive to compete on price or offer generous financial aid, leading to what plaintiffs call “inflated” tuition levels across the board.
The universities named in the lawsuit include Amherst College, Barnard College, Bowdoin College, Brown University, Bryn Mawr College, Carleton College, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Duke University, Haverford College, Middlebury College, Northwestern University, Pomona College, Rice University, Swarthmore College Vanderbilt University, Vassar College, Washington University in St. Louis, Wellesley College, Wesleyan University, and Williams College.
At least one of the institutions named in the lawsuit is rejecting the accusations and preparing to defend itself.
”The class action complaint filed against Williams College relating to its Early Decision admissions program is wholly without merit,” Williams College Chief Communications Officer Meike Kaan told The Williams Record. Kaan stated the college’s admissions process is “transparent and fair” to all applicants.
[RELATED: Trump administration launches civil rights probe into Duke’s race preference policies]
If the plaintiffs prevail, the case could trigger major reforms to Early Decision admissions nationwide, forcing elite schools to rethink long-standing enrollment strategies and potentially repay students for tuition they allege was artificially inflated.
The legal fallout could also set a precedent for other admissions-related antitrust challenges.
The lawsuit follows other high-profile antitrust disputes in higher education, including Duke University’s $24 million settlement in 2024 over allegations of need-aware admissions policies that reduced aid competition. Plaintiffs in the new case argue that the Early Decision system is another example of selective schools placing institutional advantage over student affordability, locking in revenue streams at the expense of economic fairness and access.
Should the court side with the plaintiffs, universities may be forced to dismantle or radically restructure Early Decision programs, ending what critics describe as a “pay-to-play” admissions track that favors the wealthy while sidelining middle- and working-class applicants.
Editor’s note: A previous version of this article erroneously included several institutions as defendants in the class action lawsuit. These colleges were not named in the legal filing, and we regret the error.