Michael Dannenberg tries to wriggle out of a difficult position by saying that legacy preferences “don’t do anything for diversity.” He wants to preserve preferences on some grounds, but not family ties to the institution.

But how does he know that children of alumni don’t need to have a “critical mass” so that they don’t feel “isolated”? After all, without a “critical mass” of legacy students, those who were admitted could think that they were merely “tokens.”

Isn’t that a rather silly argument? Yes, it is — just as silly as the “critical mass” arguments in favor of racial preferences.