Notre Dame Refuses to Settle $320M “Price-Fixing Cartel” Lawsuit—Evidence Shows University Favored Wealthy Donors’ Kids
Notre Dame is one of five elite universities still fighting a massive class action alleging the “568 Cartel” illegally colluded to limit financial aid from 2003-2024, inflating costs for over 200,000 students. While 12 of 17 defendant schools settled for a combined $320 million, Notre Dame filed a motion for summary judgment in May 2025 and continues litigating.
Court documents reveal Notre Dame admitted giving preferential admissions treatment to wealthy donors’ children despite claiming “need-blind” admissions, with 2017 data showing 64% admission rates for “University Relations” applicants versus 18% for non-priority students. The lawsuit alleges universities violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by sharing financial aid formulas, artificially reducing aid packages and making working-class students overpay.
What Is the Notre Dame Lawsuit About?
The class action lawsuit Henry, et al. v. Brown University, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-00125, Northern District of Illinois) filed January 2022 alleges 17 elite universities—including Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn—formed an illegal price-fixing cartel that conspired to reduce financial aid awards. The schools collaborated through the 568 Presidents Group, which allowed them to share financial aid methodologies under a 1994 federal antitrust exemption—but only if they maintained completely need-blind admissions.
The plaintiffs claim at least nine schools, including Notre Dame, violated the exemption’s core requirement by considering applicants’ wealth and donor connections in admissions decisions. This breach allegedly stripped them of antitrust immunity, exposing them to Sherman Act liability for coordinating financial aid formulas that artificially inflated college costs.
The lawsuit seeks damages for students who attended these universities from 2003-2024 and paid more for their education than they would have in a competitive market. With over 200,000 affected students, the potential liability is massive—prompting 12 schools to settle for $320 million total. Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn continue fighting.
Timeline of Legal Developments
1994: Congress passed Section 568 of the Improving America’s Schools Act, exempting universities from antitrust review if they maintained need-blind admissions and worked together on financial aid standards.
2003-2024: Universities allegedly used shared financial aid formulas through 568 Presidents Group while secretly favoring wealthy applicants.
2015: Notre Dame’s director of financial aid Mary Nucciarone celebrated Congress’ renewal of the Section 568 exemption, allowing continued use of shared formulas.
January 2022: Plaintiffs filed class action in Northern District of Illinois alleging Sherman Antitrust Act violations.
2022: Section 568 exemption expired when Congress failed to renew it—meaning schools are now bound by antitrust laws.
January 2023: University of Chicago settled for $13.5 million.
January 2024: Brown, Columbia, Duke, Yale, and Emory reached settlements totaling over $100 million.
September 2024: Dartmouth, Rice, Northwestern, and Vanderbilt settled, bringing total settlements to $284 million.
July 2024: Court granted final approval of initial 10 university settlements.
June-July 2025: CalTech ($16.75M) and Johns Hopkins ($18.5M) settled, raising total settlements to $320.25 million.
May 7, 2025: Notre Dame filed motion for summary judgment, signaling intent to continue fighting rather than settle.
December 17, 2024: Original claims deadline passed (extended to December 27, 2025 for CalTech/Johns Hopkins claimants).
Current Status: Case continues against Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn.
Who Are the Parties Involved?
Named Plaintiffs:
- Students and alumni who attended defendant universities from 2003-2024
- Received need-based financial aid that didn’t cover full attendance costs
- Estimate 200,000+ class members
Defendants Who Settled ($320.25M total):
- Brown University ($19.5M)
- University of Chicago ($13.5M)
- Columbia University ($24M)
- Dartmouth College (amount undisclosed)
- Duke University ($24M)
- Emory University ($18.5M)
- Northwestern University (amount undisclosed)
- Rice University ($33.7M—highest amount)
- Vanderbilt University ($55M)
- Yale University ($18.5M)
- California Institute of Technology ($16.75M)
- Johns Hopkins University ($18.5M)
Defendants Still Fighting:
- University of Notre Dame du Lac
- Cornell University
- Georgetown University
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- University of Pennsylvania
Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Judge: Hon. Matthew F. Kennelly
Plaintiffs’ Attorneys: Gilbert Litigators & Counselors PC; Berger Montague PC; Freedman Normand Friedland LLP
Legal Framework: Sherman Antitrust Act and Section 568
Sherman Antitrust Act
The Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1) prohibits contracts, combinations, or conspiracies that unreasonably restrain trade. Price-fixing—agreements among competitors to set prices—constitutes a per se violation, meaning it’s illegal without inquiry into reasonableness.
The plaintiffs allege universities agreed to:
- Share financial aid formulas and methodologies
- Limit competition for students through coordinated aid calculations
- Artificially reduce financial aid packages
- Inflate net costs students paid
This alleged conspiracy violated the Sherman Act by eliminating competitive pressure that would have forced schools to offer more generous aid packages to attract students.
Section 568 Exemption (1994-2022)
Section 568 of the Improving America’s Schools Act created a narrow exemption allowing universities to collaborate on financial aid standards if:
- They admitted students on a need-blind basis (without considering ability to pay)
- They met 100% of demonstrated financial need
- They used common principles to determine need
This exemption explicitly required complete need-blindness. Any consideration of wealth, donor status, or ability to pay violated the exemption and exposed schools to antitrust liability.
Critical Fact: The exemption expired in 2022 when Congress didn’t renew it. Schools are now fully subject to antitrust laws.
Evidence Against Notre Dame
Court documents obtained by The Observer reveal Notre Dame’s violations of need-blind admissions:
Internal Quote from Former Associate VP Don Bishop: “We allowed their high gifting or potential gifting to influence our choices more this year than last year — because they simply were ranked and larger donors. Sure hope the wealthy next year raise a few more smart kids.”
2017 Admissions Data:
- “University Relations” applicants (donors/potential donors): 64% admission rate
- “Non-priority” applicants: 18% admission rate
2007-2016 Test Score Analysis by Plaintiff’s Expert Hal J. Singer:
- Non-priority applicants had statistically significantly higher mean ACT scores every year from 2007-2016
- Non-priority applicants had statistically significantly higher mean SAT scores from 2007-2015
- Donor-designated applicants were admitted despite lower academic qualifications
Notre Dame’s Own Admission: The university stipulated that every year from 2003-2022, it “in some instances admitted students based on factors which included the applicant’s family’s donation history and/or capacity for future donations.”
2020 Internal Report: 86 donor-influenced admitted students enrolled in 2020, with 65 requiring “special consideration” for admission—meaning they wouldn’t have been admitted on academic merit alone.
Risk Assessment: Notre Dame’s Institutional Risk and Compliance Committee identified growing numbers of donors and their children as a “top four risk” to the university.
This evidence demonstrates Notre Dame violated need-blind requirements, potentially stripping them of Section 568 protection and exposing them to full Sherman Act liability.
What Are the Legal Claims?
Sherman Act Section 1 Violation (15 U.S.C. § 1): Plaintiffs allege horizontal price-fixing conspiracy among competitors (universities) to:
- Share and coordinate financial aid formulas
- Reduce financial aid competition
- Artificially limit aid packages
- Inflate net prices students paid
Breach of Section 568 Requirements: Schools claimed exemption protection while systematically violating need-blind admissions requirement.
Class Certification: Court certified settlement class including all U.S. citizens/permanent residents who:
- Enrolled full-time as undergraduates at defendant universities during class period
- Received need-based financial aid
- Had costs not fully covered by aid (excluding loans)
Damages Sought: Compensatory damages for overcharges, trebled under antitrust law, plus attorney’s fees and costs.
Class Period:
- Notre Dame, Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, MIT, Northwestern, Penn, Rice, Vanderbilt, Yale: Fall 2003 – February 28, 2024
- Brown, Dartmouth, Emory: Fall 2004 – February 28, 2024
- CalTech: Fall 2019 – February 28, 2024
- Johns Hopkins: Fall 2021 – February 28, 2024
Why Notre Dame Refuses to Settle
While 12 universities settled for $320 million, Notre Dame filed a motion for summary judgment on May 7, 2025, signaling intent to fight to the end. Potential reasons:
Denial of Wrongdoing: Notre Dame maintains its financial aid policies were “legal and pro-competitive” and that it has “valid defenses” to plaintiffs’ allegations.
Belief in Strong Defense: The summary judgment motion suggests Notre Dame believes it can win dismissal on legal grounds before trial.
Principle Over Pragmatism: Some universities view settlement as admission of wrongdoing. Notre Dame may prioritize defending its reputation over avoiding litigation costs.
Different Risk Assessment: Notre Dame may calculate that trial costs plus potential judgment would be less than settlement demands.
Recent Financial Aid Expansion: In September 2024, Notre Dame President Fr. Robert Dowd announced the university would go need-blind and loan-free for all students, including international students. This policy change might strengthen Notre Dame’s defense by demonstrating current commitment to access.
Timing of Awareness: Some defendants claim they were unaware of the full scope of the conspiracy or believed their conduct was legal under Section 568.
What the Settlements Provide
The 12 settling universities agreed to pay $320.25 million total. Students who attended any of the 17 defendant universities—including Notre Dame—can file claims for settlement payments even if their school hasn’t settled.
Settlement Terms:
- $320.25 million cash fund
- Average payout approximately $2,000 per claimant (assuming 50% claim rate)
- Payments vary based on:
- Net price of university attended
- Dates of attendance
- Number of valid claims filed
Important: Because plaintiffs allege a conspiracy with joint and several liability, students who attended non-settling schools (Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, Penn) can still recover from the settlement fund.
Claims Deadline: December 27, 2025 (extended deadline for CalTech/Johns Hopkins additions).
Attorney’s Fees: Court approved approximately 33% of settlement fund plus costs.
Students must submit claims at FinancialAidAntitrustSettlement.com with proof of attendance and financial aid receipt.
Legal Implications for Higher Education
Antitrust Scrutiny of College Collaboration
This case signals increased antitrust enforcement in higher education. The expiration of Section 568 means all university financial aid coordination now faces full Sherman Act scrutiny.
End of Coordinated Aid Formulas: Universities can no longer share or coordinate financial aid methodologies without antitrust risk.
Competition Required: Schools must independently determine aid packages, creating competitive pressure to offer more generous terms.
“Need-Blind” Must Mean Blind: Any consideration of wealth, donor status, or family connections in admissions violates need-blind standards and exposes schools to liability.
Pressure on Remaining Defendants
The $320 million in settlements creates enormous pressure on Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn to settle. Each day of continued litigation increases:
- Legal costs (potentially millions in attorney’s fees)
- Discovery exposure (more damaging documents)
- Reputational harm (negative publicity about donor preferences)
- Risk of larger jury verdict (juries may punish holdouts)
- Potential treble damages (antitrust allows 3x actual damages)
Impact on College Affordability
If the lawsuit succeeds, universities may face pressure to:
- Increase financial aid budgets
- Compete more aggressively for students
- Eliminate donor preferences in admissions
- Provide more transparency in aid calculations
However, without coordinated methodologies, aid awards may become less predictable and more variable across schools.
Broader Class Actions
This case spawned additional litigation:
Noncustodial Parent Lawsuit (October 2024): New class action filed against Northwestern, Notre Dame, and 38 other schools alleging conspiracy to require inclusion of noncustodial parent income in financial aid calculations, artificially reducing aid for divorced families.
These cascading lawsuits suggest sustained antitrust scrutiny of college financial practices.
What Students Can Do
Current and Former Students (2003-2024):
- File a Claim: Visit FinancialAidAntitrustSettlement.com before December 27, 2025
- Gather Documentation:
- Proof of enrollment (transcripts, student ID)
- Financial aid award letters
- Tuition bills showing out-of-pocket costs
- Verify Eligibility:
- U.S. citizen or permanent resident
- Full-time undergraduate at defendant university during class period
- Received need-based financial aid
- Had costs not fully covered by aid/merit scholarships (excluding loans)
No Need to Hire Attorney: The settlement administration handles claims processing. Attorneys receive fees from settlement fund, not individual claims.
Students at Non-Settling Schools: You can still claim from the settlement fund even though Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn haven’t settled. Recovery isn’t limited to settlements from your specific university.
Notre Dame’s Response
Notre Dame’s official statements emphasize:
Expanded Access: President Fr. Robert Dowd’s September 2024 announcement of need-blind, loan-free admissions for all students (including international) demonstrates current commitment to accessibility.
Ongoing Litigation: Notre Dame maintains the lawsuit lacks merit and intends to defend vigorously, as evidenced by its May 2025 summary judgment motion.
Policy Changes: The university’s recent financial aid expansion potentially strengthens its defense by showing evolution beyond alleged past practices.
Notre Dame student reactions are mixed. Some praise generous financial aid packages, while others criticize high tuition prices and question whether price-fixing claims have merit given the university’s expansion of aid offerings.
What Happens Next
Immediate Timeline:
- December 27, 2025: Final claims deadline for CalTech/Johns Hopkins settlements
- Q1 2026: Settlement administrator processes claims and calculates individual payments
- Q2 2026: Estimated settlement distribution to approved claimants
Ongoing Litigation Against Five Schools:
Notre Dame, MIT, Cornell, Georgetown, and Penn face:
- Summary judgment motions and responses
- Continued discovery and document production
- Potential trial (likely 2026 or later)
- Risk of larger jury verdict than settlement amounts
- Possible treble damages under Sherman Act
- Attorney’s fees if they lose
Appeals: Any final judgment will likely be appealed to Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, potentially delaying resolution by 1-2 years.
Congressional Action: Universities continue lobbying Congress to renew Section 568 exemption with stronger need-blind enforcement mechanisms.
Key Takeaways
- Notre Dame Stands Alone: One of only five universities refusing to settle despite $320M in settlements from 12 co-defendants
- Evidence of Donor Preferences: Court documents show 64% admission rate for donor-connected applicants vs. 18% for others, violating need-blind requirements
- Students Can Still Claim: Notre Dame students can file claims for settlement payments even though the university hasn’t settled
- Massive Exposure: Continued litigation risks larger jury verdict, treble damages, and mounting legal costs
- Policy Changes: Notre Dame’s recent shift to need-blind, loan-free admissions may strengthen its defense
- Industry Impact: The case ends era of coordinated financial aid formulas and increases competitive pressure on aid packages
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Can Notre Dame students claim settlement money even though Notre Dame didn’t settle?
A: Yes. Because plaintiffs allege a conspiracy with joint and several liability, all students who attended any of the 17 defendant universities can claim from the settlement fund regardless of which schools settled.
Q: Why is Notre Dame still fighting when 12 schools settled?
A: Notre Dame filed a summary judgment motion in May 2025, suggesting it believes it can win dismissal on legal grounds. The university may also prioritize defending its reputation and recent policy changes over settling.
Q: What did Notre Dame do wrong?
A: Court documents show Notre Dame admitted students based on family donation history and capacity for future donations from 2003-2022, despite claiming need-blind admissions. Data revealed 64% admission rates for donor-connected applicants versus 18% for non-priority applicants, and admitted donor-connected students had significantly lower test scores.
Q: How much money could students receive?
A: Average payments are estimated at $2,000 per claimant from current settlements, assuming 50% claim rate among 200,000 eligible students. Amounts vary based on net price paid, attendance dates, and total claims filed.
Q: What is the Sherman Antitrust Act?
A: Federal law prohibiting agreements among competitors that restrain trade. Price-fixing—coordinating prices or formulas—is per se illegal. Universities allegedly violated the Sherman Act by sharing financial aid formulas to limit competition and reduce aid packages.
Q: Could Notre Dame lose at trial and pay more than settlement amounts?
A: Yes. Trial risks include larger jury verdicts, treble damages (3x actual damages under antitrust law), and attorney’s fees. Some settling schools paid $13-55 million; Notre Dame’s exposure could be substantially higher if it loses at trial.
Q: What is Section 568 and why did it expire?
A: A 1994 law exempting universities from antitrust review if they maintained need-blind admissions while collaborating on financial aid standards. It expired in 2022 when Congress didn’t renew it, exposing schools to full antitrust liability.
This article provides legal information about the Notre Dame financial aid antitrust lawsuit but does not constitute legal advice. Students with questions about claims should consult the settlement website at FinancialAidAntitrustSettlement.com or contact class counsel.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah