The U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division concluded on June 10 that the UC Davis School of Medicine in California used unlawful race-based methods in its admissions process after a six-month investigation. The determination cited conflict with the 2026 SFFA ruling and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and it placed the school on notice for settlement talks or potential litigation.
The finding matters because medical schools receive federal funds and must comply with non-discrimination laws, and because admissions standards shape the future physician workforce. The review comes amid broader scrutiny of medical schools’ post-SFFA practices and could influence how institutions nationwide structure admissions while pursuing diversity within legal limits. Latest update: 15 June 2026.
The Justice Department said its 2026 data review revealed significant disparities in outcomes across applicant groups. It reported that 93% of white and certain Asian admittees had MCAT scores at or above the average score of Black admittees, and that Black and Hispanic applicants were admitted at rates up to six times higher than white and Asian applicants with stronger academic metrics. Officials indicated they will pursue settlement negotiations to bring the program into compliance and will file suit if talks fail.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon characterized the conduct as serious, stating, “Davis Med’s actions reflect both unabashed contempt for the rule of law and plain disregard for the potential public health consequences of putting race over merit, skill, and competence.” The Department also said similar determinations have been made for UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine and Yale School of Medicine, underscoring a widening federal focus on medical school admissions following SFFA.
The Davis Scale and alleged use of proxies
At the center of the UC Davis case is the Davis Scale a model that scored applicants across eight socioeconomic factors, including parental income and education and whether an applicant grew up in a medically underserved area. Investigators said the method functioned as a proxy for race by systematically adjusting the weight of GPA and MCAT in ways that correlated with racial categories, thereby contravening Title VI and the SFFA ruling’s limits on race-conscious decision-making.
Documents reviewed in the probe show Associate Dean of Admissions Dr. Mark Henderson describing the approach as “class-based affirmative action” and acknowledging overlap between class and race, adding, “that’s how we skirted the issue.” School data cited in the investigation indicated the share of underrepresented in medicine students rose from 24% in 2011 to 58% in 2026. The DOJ said it will require changes to ensure individual, race-neutral assessments if a settlement is reached.
Financial stakes and sector-wide implications
Admissions decisions carry substantial financial impact for applicants, with medical graduates often shouldering average debt around $202,000. Federal officials linked rigorous, lawful standards to safeguarding quality and public health, arguing that admissions must prioritize merit-based criteria within permissible diversity strategies. The Department signaled continued monitoring of medical schools that receive federal aid to enforce nondiscrimination requirements.
UC Davis now faces negotiations that could reshape how the Davis Scale or any successor tool operates, including how socioeconomic factors are weighed without serving as race substitutes. With additional institutions flagged for similar patterns, the outcome at Davis could set a practical template for compliant admissions models across medical education while the DOJ maintains readiness to litigate to ensure adherence.
