An Illinois federal judge dismissed a major antitrust lawsuit, which alleged that Cornell and 39 other private colleges and universities colluded to reduce financial aid for students on Sept. 25.
Filed in October 2024 by Eileen Chang ’21 and Boston University student Maxwell Hanse, the lawsuit alleged that Cornell and dozens of other colleges worked together through the College Board’s College Scholarship Service Profile to develop and use the Noncustodial Parent Agreed Pricing Strategy, requiring noncustodial parents’ financial information in aid calculations.
According to the complaint, which cites a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, the alleged collusion increased students’ net cost of attendance by roughly $6,200 a year.
The Sherman Antitrust Act, passed in 1890, is a federal law aimed at prohibiting monopolies by restricting collusion that might limit competition.
In this case, the plaintiffs argued that by coordinating through the College Board’s system, rather than independently determining aid policies, the universities violated the Act’s prohibition on agreements that unreasonably restrict trade. The court rejected this argument.
“Nothing in Plaintiffs’ complaint suggests that the University Defendants exchanged their own internal financial aid decisionmaking processes or guidelines or otherwise shared … the amount of financial aid they planned to offer a particular student,” wrote U.S. District Judge of the Northern District of Illinois Sara Ellis in the court’s opinion.
The dismissal means Cornell and the other schools named in the complaint will not face discovery, the process in which parties in a lawsuit exchange information and evidence. Because the ruling was without prejudice, the plaintiffs have the option to file an amended complaint that addresses the judge’s concerns.
The University declined to comment to The Sun on the dismissal of the case.
The complaint listed numerous other institutions, including every member of the Ivy League besides Princeton, as well as the California Institute of Technology, Northwestern University and Georgetown University. The suit framed the price-fixing as a collective decision dating back to 2006, when the College Board first expanded requirements for the CSS Profile.
However, Ellis found that the complaint did not include sufficient detail showing that the schools worked together to collude to reduce financial aid.
“While these allegations indicate that the brokers had an opportunity to conspire, they do not plausibly imply that each broker acted other than independently…” she wrote.
