Bill · S. 5116· Senate(119-S-5116)
MERIT Act
- Introduced
- 7/23/2026
- Last activity
- 7/23/2026 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- Sponsored by
- Todd Young
- Cosponsors
- - 2 - 3
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The MERIT Act seeks to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 regarding accreditation standards. It requires institutions of higher education to adopt admissions practices that avoid preferential treatment based on an applicant's relationship to alumni or donors. The bill provides a specific definition for what constitutes preferential treatment in these scenarios. It also establishes rules regarding the consideration of demonstrated interest and protects the rights of faith-based institutions. Additionally, the bill authorizes a feasibility study to explore new ways of collecting data on how these admissions decisions impact institutions.
Yes· 3 of 7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+5
The bill requires the Secretary of Education to submit biennial public reports on compliance and monitoring efforts.
Does this protect the freedom to practise a religion?+5
The bill explicitly protects the right of religious institutions to make admissions decisions consistent with their faith-based values.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+4
The bill promotes more equitable access by restricting admissions advantages tied to alumni or donor status.
The opposite
Would high-income households be better off under this?-5
The bill restricts the ability of wealthy donors to secure admissions advantages for their children.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Fairer Admissions Processes: By requiring accreditation standards to assess the adoption of practices that refrain from preferential treatment based on alumni or donor relationships, the bill aims to change how institutions handle admissions (Section 2(a)(1)(G)).
-
Clearer Rules for Demonstrated Interest: The bill allows institutions to consider an applicant's "demonstrated interest" as long as the criteria are public, the applicant can explain their interest through lived experiences, and the opportunities are equally accessible to everyone regardless of financial status or affiliations (Section 2(b)(2)).
-
Protection for Religious Institutions: The Act ensures that religious institutions can still make admissions decisions that align with their specific faith-based values (Section 2(b)(3)).
-
Increased Transparency and Oversight: The Secretary of Education is required to submit biennial reports to Congressional committees regarding compliance, technical assistance, and monitoring, which are also made available to the public (Section 2(c)(1)).
-
Improved Data Collection: The bill authorizes a study to see if the National Student Clearinghouse can produce analysis on the impact of admissions decisions based on alumni or donor relationships, which could lead to better understanding of institutional practices (Section 3(a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Restrictions on Admissions Decisions: The definition of "preferential treatment" includes making admissions decisions or awarding tangible education benefits where a relationship to an alumnus or donor is the determining factor, which restricts certain traditional admissions practices (Section 2(a)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Low Income Households+4Good For Students+4Good For Middle Class Households+3Good For High Income Households-5
- Education And Technology
- Improves Data Privacy+3Improves College Affordability+2
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+5
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Religious Freedom+5
- 7/23/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
Timothy KaineDemocrat · Virginia
John KennedyRepublican · Louisiana
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Tim ScottRepublican · South Carolina
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia