In an explosive twist of irony, UC San Diego’s attempt to navigate around race-based scholarship bans has landed it in a legal battle under a law originally designed to combat racial conspiracies.
The Legal Challenge Unfolds
In July 2025, the lawsuit against UC San Diego and the San Diego Foundation was filed by the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation and a UCSD student, Kai Peters, represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation. The suit claims these institutions conspired to deprive students of their civil rights by maintaining a race-based scholarship, violating the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871—a law aimed at preventing racial conspiracies by public and private entities.
This legal battle arises amidst a broader trend where public universities partner with private nonprofits to continue race-based scholarships post-affirmative action bans. UCSD’s BASF, established in 1983, was transferred to the San Diego Foundation after Proposition 209 prohibited race-based scholarships in California. Despite legal challenges, UCSD has persisted in supporting this fund, which has awarded over $800,000 to more than 350 students since 2002.
Implications for Diversity Initiatives
Should the lawsuit succeed, it could reshape the landscape for similar scholarships at public universities across the country. The case questions the legality of public institutions employing private nonprofits to circumvent state and federal anti-discrimination laws. A ruling against UCSD could force universities to rethink or discontinue their partnerships with private entities for race-based scholarships, significantly impacting diversity initiatives.
NEW: When the NAACP used the KKK Act of 1871 to sue Donald Trump and the RNC for working to "disenfranchise black voters," the director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism told NBC, "I guess it tells you something when you can use a Ku Klux Klan law from the 1870s."… pic.twitter.com/dLW2DFmQkR
— Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) July 18, 2025
Legal uncertainty looms over BASF’s operations, potentially affecting donor confidence and the fund’s goal of reaching a $10 million endowment by 2028. Black students at UCSD might face uncertainty regarding future scholarship availability, affecting their financial and academic support.
Stakeholders and Their Roles
The key stakeholders in this situation include UCSD, the San Diego Foundation, the BASF Advisory Board, Black students at UCSD, and legal entities like the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation and the Pacific Legal Foundation. Each plays a significant role in either supporting or challenging the fund’s operations.
UCSD leadership, including Chancellor Pradeep Khosla, has publicly supported BASF and its mission to promote diversity on campus. In contrast, the Pacific Legal Foundation, representing the plaintiffs, argues that the government cannot outsource racial discrimination to private parties, asserting the need for Section 1985’s protection today.
Potential Outcomes and Broader Effects
The lawsuit’s outcome may have far-reaching effects beyond UCSD. If successful, it could establish a legal precedent affecting similar race-based scholarships at public universities like those in Texas and Michigan. The case might also influence state and national policies on race-conscious programs in education.
Fun fact. Pam Bondi has ties with the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025.
But, here's the cherry on top. Bondi conspired to deprive Pennsylvanians of their civil rights under the KU KLUX KLAN ACT. pic.twitter.com/tszWgUqT8T— 💛September💜Rayne🖤 (@Lippyaddiction) January 15, 2025
Economically, reduced scholarship funding could hinder college access and graduation rates for underrepresented students, exacerbating existing inequities. Socially and politically, the case could fuel debates over affirmative action, equity, and the role of private philanthropy in public education. The legal proceedings will likely serve as a pivotal point in the ongoing struggle between diversity initiatives and anti-affirmative action legislation.