FEATURED
School claims lawsuit is ‘moot’
Young America’s Foundation, in conjunction with the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, recently filed a lawsuit against the University of Wisconsin–Madison, challenging at least 20 taxpayer-funded scholarships and grants that contain race-based criteria.
One such scholarship is the Lawton Undergraduate Minority Retention Grant Program, which seeks “to provide financial assistance to statutorily designated minority undergraduate students,” according to the UW System website.
The Lawton Program notes that it is only available to “Black, Hispanic, Native American and Southeast Asians of Vietnamese, Cambodian or Laotian descent.”
Another scholarship, the Alliant Energy/Erroll V. David Achievement Award, is available only to African American, Hispanic or Latino, American Indian, Southeast Asian, and other underrepresented groups.
Further, the Franklin D. Wilson Great People Scholarship and Jeffrey Scott Newman Fund state that eligible students must be black. Several other scholarships, including the Louis and Molly Hinshaw Student Support Fund and the Martin and Lynn Preizler Scholarship, are only available to American Indian, Asian, black, Hawaiian/Pacific Isla, and Hispanic students, according to the lawsuit.
“For other scholarships, like the Department of Bacteriology Underrepresented Minority Undergraduate Student Scholarship, the racial requirement is in the title,” the lawsuit states.
Rebecca Furdek, deputy counsel at WILL, told The College Fix that a previous decision from the Wisconsin Supreme Court found a similar scholarship program, called the Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant Program, violated the Equal Protection Clause.
“Just like the MURG Program, the Lawton Program restricts eligibility to statutorily-defined minority students,” Furdek said, citing the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in Rabiebna v. Higher Educational Aids Board.
The court ruled the grant program unconstitutional “by impermissibly limiting eligibility to students who belong to specified racial, national origin, ancestry, or alienage-based groups.”
Furdek and WILL seek to apply the same legal principles in the lawsuit alongside YAF. The deputy counsel told The Fix she is pursuing three main outcomes.
First, she asks that the Wisconsin Supreme Court declare that “any race, national origin, and alienage classifications, preferences or requirements in any UW-Madison undergraduate and graduate student scholarships are unconstitutional.”
Second, she wants a similar declaration that “the statute under which the Lawton Program is administered is unconstitutional.”
Finally, she requests “a permanent injunction form enforcing any such stated race-based classifications, preferences, or requirements.”
Chris Byrnes, general counsel at Young America’s Foundation, told The Fix that YAF joined this lawsuit because its students “are often locked out of scholarships that are awarded on the basis of skin color.”
“YAF is always on the lookout to take down unconstitutional barriers to academic and professional opportunities for its student members and indeed for all students,” Byrnes said.
Byrnes added that YAF has seen similar victories in previous cases, referencing “a big victory against race-restrictive scholarships when the U.S. Department of Education dropped racial criteria for its McNair Scholars Program.”
“YAF would hope that colleges nationwide would honor the promise of equal protection and administer all scholarships and financial aid in a race-neutral manner,” Byrnes said.
When asked what YAF hopes for beyond the outcome of the case, he said, “YAF would hope that all colleges—both public and private—make academic opportunities available to all, regardless of a student’s skin color.”
“Every student deserves to be evaluated as an individual and judged by their accomplishments, character, and work ethic,” Byrnes said.
However, the school claims the lawsuit is without merit.
Gillian Drummond, director of public affairs at UW–Madison, told The Fix that “On July 6, 2026, the Universities of Wisconsin formally rescinded its Lawton policy to address the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rabiebna.”
“WILL’s claim challenging UW-Madison’s compliance with the state statute that created the Lawton program was moot before it was even filed,” Drummond said.
The spokesperson added that if any remaining litigation exists, “The university is prepared to vigorously defend this lawsuit.”
“The remaining claim regarding UW-Madison’s pool and match process is also without merit as the method complies with the university’s legal obligations,” Drummond said.
The Supreme Court’s decision in SFFA v. Harvard lays out five independent tests that a racial classification must survive to be considered lawful. WILL argues that “UW-Madison’s race-based scholarships and grants fail each of these independent tests.”
This development comes two months after The College Fix reported on UW–Madison’s curriculum centered on “anti-racist behaviors” and “social justice.”
