[take_a_breath]

Then the concept of “legacy students” should be illegal.

[LanceH]

Alumni paying millions (billions) of dollars over years is of great merit to a private university.

[take_a_breath]

Sure, but it proves that admission is not based on the student’s merit. It discriminates against those whose parents did not attend the school.

[LanceH]

Alternately, it rewards those who made the school great in the first place -- by admitting their children.

Note that it's not strictly zero sum either. Huge grants by previous may have opened the university to more people than are admitted by legacy admissions -- yielding greater participation by non-legacy than previously possible.

People are choosing one small slice of what goes on with a university -- admissions right now. They are glossing over the fact that it is other people who made the university great over the years to the point that it is desirable at all. Those people made it great by donating money and going on to bring prestige to the university. Ignore them and lose the prestige and money.

[take_a_breath]

==They are glossing over the fact that it is other people who made the university great over the years to the point that it is desirable at all. Those people made it great by donating money and going on to bring prestige to the university. Ignore them and lose the prestige and money.==

Nobody is glossing over that fact. I am simply saying that if anything outside of a student's merit is "discrimination", then taking into account the alumni status or past contributions of [not that student] is also "discrimination".

They are not the student's merits to weigh, they are the relative's merits.