Court Tosses Minority Grant, But Options Remain To Aid Students

UW-Madison students walk on campus Tuesday, May 6, 2025, in Madison, Wis. Angela Major/WPR

After the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s ruling that a state college grant program for minority students is unconstitutional, an education policy researcher says any move that reduces options for financial aid will further the state’s college affordability crisis.

Created in 1985, the Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant Program offered up to $2,500 in financial assistance to students who are Black, American Indian, Hispanic or from some parts of Southeast Asia. In a unanimous ruling, the court found the program violates the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law regardless of race or ethnicity. The decision aligns with a 2023 ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court that limited race-based college admissions.

That means Wisconsin colleges and universities have lost some — but not all — of the tools at their disposal for improving diversity in higher education.

Education policy researcher Taylor Odle told WPR’s “Wisconsin Today” that he’s concerned the state is losing a program that improves financial access to college at a time when Wisconsin is already spending dramatically less on per-student financial aid than other states. Wisconsin has a lower-than-average “sticker price” for college, but the affordability gap for students at public bachelor’s-granting institutions is more than twice the national average.

Odle said he hopes the program will be repurposed to support other students who are seeking to complete college. He discussed that and more with “Wisconsin Today.”

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Rob Ferrett: What do you see as the impact of yesterday’s ruling? 

Taylor Odle: At its core, this is a scholarship program meant to help increase affordability for students and families to access college in the state. … This is a retention grant program, so it’s serving students who are already in college to help get them across the finish line. We know the data show that there are already these widespread disparities in retention rates across many dimensions, not just race. As someone who cares about increasing opportunities to higher education (and) to career and technical training, I kind of see this as a double blow to Wisconsin — first as a scholarship program, and second as one focused on supporting students who face particularly high barriers already in college.

RF: The argument that students from these minority groups face higher barriers, that’s something that doesn’t seem to please the courts at this point. Is there a case for that?

TO: The data are very clear that opportunity and success are not evenly distributed across groups. This applies to racially and ethnically minoritized groups, but it also applies to other important populations. Veteran students and non-veterans, students who are from low-income backgrounds and high-income families, students from rural areas and urban areas — don’t persist and attain (higher education) in the same way. So this program in 1985 was likely the state saying, “Hey, we see some differences in success rates across students across the state. What can we do to invest to help equalize those things?”

That could be for a variety of arguments. It could be for efficiency — if we already have people in college (and) we put in some extra money to help them finish, for taxpayer dollars that’s going to be a huge return on investment.

At the end of the day, this is a scholarship program, and Wisconsin remains one of the most unaffordable states in the country for students, and that’s where I think we should put most of our attention. (This program) served about 770 students. (But) we have over 200,000 enrolled across the state. A concern I have is that the average student or family might see this as a redirection of financial aid dollars from one group toward another, or that their aid is going to change, but that’s really not going to happen. We have a bigger problem to deal with.

RF: Could this grant program be redirected in a way that still serves students at risk of not being retained, if it’s not based on race? 

TO: Yeah, I hope for that, and much more. Retention grants work, and financial aid is the most surefire way of increasing access and completion. The research is crystal clear on that point. I hope this propels two things. One, I hope the grant program is repurposed to support other students who are seeking to complete college. But more importantly, I hope this kind of fringe case shines a light and reinvigorates our conversation around affordability in Wisconsin. Now that folks are satisfied that these dollars are being redirected, at the end of the day it still doesn’t solve the case that our state spends less than half what our peer states spend on financial aid per student.

Wisconsin can still boost college affordability after Supreme Court ruling, researcher says was originally published by Wisconsin Public Radio.