It will- and should- be DOA. They know they have zero chance of this passing, primarily because it’s a publicity stunt.
Should colleges alter their legacy preferences? Maybe. Depends on other factors, too. Just about every single college in NY (and pretty much around the country) confers specialty status to URM, first generation, etc. In fact, in most instances that status is greater than legacy in terms of how it impacts a student’s chances. If they’re referring to the “automatic” enrollment…well, those are very few and far between these days. Spectacular giving on the part of a family, relationships that are tremendously beneficial to the school, etc.- those are what continue. General legacy is usually a little bump. I would bet that a well qualified URM or first gen student gets a significantly higher bump than a legacy kid without those attached.
So for the legacy argument to work, they’d need to change other admission tactics to bring an almost completely meritocratic admissions process. Which they of course wouldn’t want- it would clearly harm the demographics they are looking to protect, as those would be discriminated against in an open field. URM and first gen get major bumps for very good reasons.
With respect to ED? I’m all for tweaking. But I’m not sure they fully understand the ED process. Seems they don’t know (or don’t care, as this is a me,me,me publicity stunt to look progressive) that ED can be helpful to low income students. If financial considerations and needs are not met…you don’t need to attend. I’d love to see a tweak to make it even more clear and beneficial to the applicant with respect to ED committments, but tweaking is what is needed- not elimination.
Again, TLDR…This proposal would actually end up being racist in the opposite direction, as they’d eliminate mechanisms for some students while strengthening what already is a very solid form of acceptance for the demographic they are supposedly trying to help.