Education Law
‘Early decision conspiracy’ among top colleges is an antitrust violation, suit alleges
A prospective class action lawsuit accuses 32 top colleges and universities of violating antitrust laws by an “early decision conspiracy” that essentially forces applicants to be bound to a school that makes an early offer through a competitor agreement not to compete. (Image from Shutterstock)
A prospective class action lawsuit accuses 32 top colleges and universities of violating antitrust laws by an “early decision conspiracy” that essentially forces applicants to be bound to a school that makes an early offer through a competitor agreement not to compete.
The Aug. 8 suit claims that the mutual agreement among schools raises tuition prices “and entrenches a system widely acknowledged to be unfair and harmful.”
Students who apply for “early decision” indicate that they will accept any admissions offer and withdraw all other applications, according to the suit. Applicants also state that they will accept the tuition and fees as long as they can afford them after factoring in financial aid. That prevents them from considering competitor universities and comparing financial aid packages, the suit alleges.
Presenting the application as a binding agreement is a “core misrepresentation,” the suit says.
Admissions experts and school officials have acknowledged that the early decision agreement is not an enforceable contract, the suit says. That aids the schools, which can withdraw an offer if student grades fall before high school graduation or if their conduct doesn’t meet university standards.
Plaintiffs in the suit are three current students and a recent graduate at the defendant schools, according to an Aug. 8 press release.
Among the defendants are Brown University, Cornell University, Columbia University, Dartmouth College, Duke University, Johns Hopkins University, Northwestern University, Rice University, Vanderbilt University, the University of Chicago and the University of Pennsylvania.
Other defendants include the Consortium on Financing Higher Education, which facilitates information sharing among undergraduate schools, and two college application platforms.
The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, is D’Amico v. Consortium on Financing Higher Education.
The plaintiffs are represented by Langer Grogan & Diver and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll.
Publications with stories include the Chicago Maroon, Forbes and Inside Higher Ed.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
