Harvard Bans Alumni from Mentioning Applicants' Race or Religion in Admissions Reports

Harvard University has instructed its volunteer alumni interviewers to exclude any mention of an applicant's race, ethnicity, national origin, or religious affiliation from written interview reports this admissions cycle. The university clarified that any report containing such information will be disregarded, according to a recording and a new alumni-interviewer handbook obtained by The Harvard Crimson.

The guidance was delivered during training sessions held this autumn. Admissions officials advised interviewers that references to languages spoken at home, countries of origin, or named affinity groups could result in the evaluation being removed from an applicant's file. In some cases, this could even lead to the assignment of a second interviewer to ensure compliance.

A Response to Legal and Federal Developments

Harvard's move comes in the wake of the US Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which effectively banned race-conscious admissions practices at the university. This decision has prompted many elite institutions to reassess their admissions procedures amid increased federal oversight.

The policy change is framed by Harvard officials as a compliance measure. An associate director of admissions, who led one of the training sessions, explained that the new guidance aims to ensure the university can demonstrate it is not considering protected characteristics—such as race or religion—when evaluating applicants.

Impact on Class Composition and Diversity Data

The new policy coincides with recent figures on Harvard's incoming class, the Class of 2029, which comprises 1,675 students. Of these, 11.5% self-identified as Black or African American, 11% as Hispanic or Latino, and 41% as Asian American. Notably, 8% of applicants declined to report their race or ethnicity.

Harvard's published admissions statistics now reflect a change in reporting methodology, counting percentages based on students who self-reported their race. These figures follow a decline in Black and Hispanic representation at several highly selective colleges over the past two years, following the Supreme Court decision. Analyses by major news outlets and research groups have shown that the proportion of Black students at institutions previously considering race in admissions has fallen between fall 2023 and fall 2024.

Wider Federal Push and Policy Shifts

Harvard's policy shift must be viewed within a broader federal campaign aimed at restricting the use of race and related factors in university admissions. In spring 2025, the White House and federal agencies moved to withhold or pause billions of dollars in research funding to several universities amid disputes over allegations of antisemitism and concerns about compliance with civil rights laws.

More recently, the Department of Education has issued directives requiring colleges to provide data demonstrating they do not use race as a factor in admissions. These guidelines also warn that essays or geographic-based recruitment efforts could be considered unlawful proxies for race. Officials have signalled their willingness to investigate and potentially sanction institutions suspected of non-compliance.

Concerns from Critics and Legal Experts

Critics argue that preventing interviewers from capturing contextual information about applicants' backgrounds—such as involvement in community or religious organisations, or the country of origin—risks erasing critical details that explain an applicant's achievements and challenges. Such information can be vital in understanding an applicant's story and the barriers they have overcome.

Legal experts have noted that there is no explicit judicial precedent forbidding the consideration of contextual life experiences related to race or origin, especially when such information explains achievements or obstacles faced.

What Lies Ahead

Harvard's immediate implementation of these new alumni interview guidelines will be tested over this admissions cycle, as thousands of volunteer interviews take place during early decision and regular rounds. Meanwhile, ongoing federal oversight, litigation, and changing reporting practices across the higher education sector suggest that the composition of incoming classes and the evaluation processes will remain highly contested.

Research institutions and independent analyses continue to monitor application, admission, and enrolment patterns across different racial and ethnic groups. These findings will be crucial in assessing the long-term impact of the Supreme Court ruling and the federal government's enforcement strategies on higher education diversity.