DOJ Accuses UCSF Med School of Discrimination

The Department of Justice has once again announced that a medical school discriminated in its admissions practices by favoring Black and Hispanic applicants.

In findings released Tuesday, the DOJ said that the medical school at the University of California, San Francisco, had discriminated against white and Asian applicants. Federal agencies have opened at least 30 investigations in admissions discrimination claims at medical and law schools, according to a review of public statements.

UCSF is the fifth in the University of California system the DOJ has targeted; public institutions in California have been prohibited since 1996 from considering race in admissions since voters outlawed the practice.

A UCSF spokesperson wrote in a statement that the institution “disagrees” with the government’s assessment and plans to work “constructively” with the DOJ to resolve the matter.

“Admission to the UCSF School of Medicine is among the most selective in the country. Every applicant is evaluated through a rigorous, individualized review process that prioritizes academic excellence. Academic achievement is fundamental to that review,” wrote Kristen Bole, executive director for public affairs at UCSF. “Grades, prior coursework, and MCAT scores are important measures of an applicant’s readiness for a UCSF medical education. Those measures are considered alongside other factors, including clinical experience, research, service, leadership, and other experiences to identify future physicians who will excel in patient care, biomedical discovery, and service to communities across the country.”

The investigation was opened in March, according to the department’s letter to the university. As with previous findings, the department pointed to statistical evidence showing that admitted Black and Hispanic students had lower MCAT scores, on average, than the scores of admitted white and Asian students. Black and Hispanic students were also admitted at higher rates than their white and Asian peers. The department cites the UCSF medical school admissions policy, which highlight’s the institution’s “commitment to reflect the population of California in our students” as evidence that it intentionally discriminated.

The DOJ also took issue with a program run by the medical school called the Program in Medical Education, which it described as a “pipeline programs for [underrepresented minority] students in high school through medical school.” According to the DOJ, about 89 percent of the students enrolled in the PRIME program focused on serving urban areas in 2024–25 were from an underrepresented minority group. In the program focused on serving California’s San Joaquin Valley, enrollment from underrepresented minorities was 52 percent. (At the UCSF Medical School, some Asian ethnicities are counted as underrepresented minorities, the DOJ’s letter notes.)

But public-facing information about the PRIME program describes it not as a pipeline from high school, but rather a specific track of the medical program that is focused on serving underserved populations. It also usually includes a fifth year in which students complete research and earn a master’s degree. Students do not have to be Black or Hispanic to participate. Each PRIME cohort includes 23 UCSF students, or about 12 percent of the incoming med school class.

The PRIME program is over 20 years old and comprises 10 programs across the UC system. The DOJ did not reference these programs in its previous three letters to UC system medical schools, all of which operate their own PRIME programs.

Experts in civil rights law have criticized how the Trump administration is handling these investigations, arguing that disparities in MCAT scores are not sufficient to prove discrimination. Neither are statements from administrators about wanting to increase racial diversity on campus, they say. In the Supreme Court’s decision banning affirmative action in admissions, Justice John Roberts wrote that colleges could still pursue racial diversity through race-neutral methods.

Experts have also noted that the letters from DOJ outlining its findings are less detailed, and the investigation timelines are much shorter than they would expect.