University denies allegations, saying it is committed to making admissions decisions in compliance with all laws The Department of Justice said on Thursday that the law school at the University of California, Los Angeles illegally considered race in admissions. The announcement follows a similar accusation against the university’s…
Page A4From§Eachthe supper edition — 2 October 2026
Justice Department finds second UC law school guilty of same crime it hasn't proven at the first
As it ran on the front
The Department of Justice announced Thursday that UCLA's law school broke the law by considering race in admissions. The university says it denies the allegations and is committed to following every applicable law. That's the standard two-sentence rebuttal, and it's fine, because the Department is plainly just doing its job here, methodically, one UC law school at a time.
Except UCLA is the second one. Three weeks ago, on September 9th, the Department announced the same kind of finding against Berkeley's law school: illegal consideration of race, a violation of federal civil rights law. Same conclusion. Same agency.…
…(cont) Is that a coincidence? No. That is not nothing. It is also not evidence that the first finding was correct — it's evidence the Department has decided where to look.
The Berkeley file came with furniture the UCLA file, as reported Thursday, does not yet have. Allegedly. Nobody has proven that in front of a judge. It's an accusation against an office, dated September 9th, sitting exactly where the UCLA accusation is sitting now: announced, denied, unresolved.
So what we actually have is this: two law schools, two announcements, nineteen days apart, both ending in the same finding — illegal use of race — made by the same investigators under an administration that has turned college admissions scrutiny into a running program. Call that consistent. Don't call it identical; the Berkeley case carries essays and an alleged workaround from the dean, and the UCLA case, so far, carries the conclusion and not much else.
Does that make UCLA innocent? No. Does it make Berkeley guilty? Also no. The Berkeley finding is still just a finding — the Department's own word for its own accusation — and three weeks later no court has tested it.
Here's the part that's actually new: the Department found target number two before anyone outside the Department confirmed target number one. That's not a pattern of discrimination they've established. That's a pattern of them finding what they went looking for, on schedule, every few weeks, and calling it done before anyone checks their work.
“They found the same violation twice in three weeks at two UC law schools, which tells you less about the law schools and more about how fast this machine can produce a guilty verdict with no judge involved. Nobody's proven the Berkeley case in a courtroom yet and they've already moved on to the second file — that's not an investigation, that's a quota.”
“Look, the Department found a real violation, did it again, two for two, that's just thoroughness — wait, did I say "found"? I meant "alleged." The dean "allegedly" discussed workarounds, the essays "allegedly" favored — none of that's been proven anywhere but a DOJ press release, which, come to think of it, is the only place any of this has been proven.”
The receipts
· UC Berkeley Law discriminated in admissions, Trump administration finds from the morgue, 9 Sep 2026
· UC Berkeley Law intentionally discriminated against white, Asian applicants: Feds from the morgue, 9 Sep 2026
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front. The byline is a pen name for a column drafted by a machine and checked by the editor: how this is made.