Back in the 90s, there was a push to pass legislation banning or limiting legacy admissions, coming from a staffer in Ted Kennedy's office IIRC. Lobbyists from Harvard went nuclear and scared Democrats into opposing it.

I barely even need to point out that Republicans didn't need to be scared into opposing legacy admissions, as they eagerly supported them, for people who might be taken in by their meritocratic facade from the decision yesterday.

This is all documented in The Price of Admission (https://www.amazon.com/Price-Admission-Americas-Colleges-Out...).

Universities aren't as meritocratic as you might think. I really liked this book, http://www.amazon.com/Price-Admission-Americas-Colleges-Outs... I don't know if I agree with everything, but the realization that the majority of admissions at elite schools are to people who are in some way "hooked" is pretty shocking.

Also, the last Stanford graduating class was a fifth legacy students. http://www.stanforddaily.com/2009/12/02/legacies-a-fifth-of-...

That's an interesting suggestion on why to leave well enough alone. I wonder how one would check the economic effect on colleges of changing current admission policies. Daniel Golden's book _The Price of Admission_

http://www.amazon.com/Price-Admission-Americas-Colleges-Outs...

claims that colleges could be much more meritocratic in admission than they now are, but his good examples (Caltech among research universities, and Berea among small liberal arts colleges) perhaps undermine his argument.