Stanley Zhong Lawsuit: Four Universities, AI Self-Representation

The Stanley Zhong lawsuit is actually four federal lawsuits, filed in early 2025 by Stanley Zhong and his father Nan against the University of California system, the University of Washington, the University of Michigan, and Cornell University, alleging each school discriminated against Stanley in undergraduate admissions because he is Asian American. Stanley was rejected by 16 of the 18 colleges he applied to as a high school senior and was then hired by Google as a full-time software engineer at age 18. As of mid-2026, all four cases remain in early stages, and none has moved past a motion to dismiss.

Who Stanley Zhong Is

Zhong graduated from Gunn High School in Palo Alto, California, in 2023 with a 3.97 unweighted GPA (4.42 weighted) and a 1590 on the SAT.¹²³

Of the 18 schools he applied to, only the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Maryland accepted him. MIT, Stanford, Caltech, Carnegie Mellon, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Cornell, Georgia Tech, and the University of Michigan were among the schools that turned him down. He planned to enroll at UT Austin but shelved that plan in October 2023, when Google hired him as a software development engineer, a role that typically requires a Ph.D. or equivalent experience.⁴ He is still at Google, now working as an AI engineer.⁵

The Four Universities Being Sued

Between February and March 2025, Stanley and Nan Zhong filed four separate federal complaints:

Zhong v. The Regents of University of CA, No. 2:25-cv-00495, filed February 11, 2025, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.⁶
Zhong v. University of Washington Board of Regents, No. 2:25-cv-00348, filed February 21, 2025, Western District of Washington.⁷
Zhong v. University of Michigan Board of Regents, No. 5:25-cv-10579, filed February 27, 2025, Eastern District of Michigan.⁸
Zhong v. Cornell University, No. 3:25-cv-00365, filed March 22, 2025, Northern District of New York.⁹

What the Lawsuits Allege

Each complaint is brought under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming the universities violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by discriminating against Asian American applicants.¹⁰ The complaints allege Stanley suffered “the loss of educational opportunities, emotional distress, and reputational damage” from the rejections.¹¹

The suits rely heavily on the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which struck down race-conscious admissions. The Zhongs argue the defendant schools continue to use race despite that ruling, citing statistical racial disparities, evidence of racial intent, and whistleblower reports at each institution.¹²

Two of the cases include specific state-level allegations. The UC complaint claims the university system uses “workarounds” to evade Proposition 209, the 1996 California ballot measure banning racial preferences in state functions, and alleges violations of the California constitution alongside the federal claims. The Zhongs are not seeking monetary damages beyond court costs in the UC case; they want declaratory and injunctive relief, including mandatory training and compliance measures.¹³ The UW suit points to a “now-removed diversity planning document” from the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering that the Zhongs say established demographic targets for admissions.⁵

Representing Themselves With AI

In October 2024, the Zhongs founded a 501(c)(3) nonprofit called Students Who Oppose Racial Discrimination, or SWORD, with Nan Zhong as president.¹⁴¹⁰⁶⁷

The Zhongs say they went pro se after dozens of law firms declined to take the cases, citing the universities’ resources, potential court biases, and political sensitivity.¹⁵ They have spent more than $200,000 out of pocket across the four cases.⁵

To draft filings and analyze opposing motions, the Zhongs use AI tools, mainly ChatGPT and Google Gemini. Nan Zhong runs the same legal question through multiple models and compares outputs to catch mistakes. He acknowledged the risk: “The danger of hallucination is real. You still have to verify everything.”⁵ He credited AI with helping him identify nearly a dozen legal errors, including outdated case citations, in one UW filing.¹⁵ The UW Board of Regents has asked the Zhongs to turn over their AI prompts, which may be subject to subpoena.

The family has since picked up counsel in some cases. Attorney Michael T. Allen of Allen Harris PLLC entered an appearance in the Cornell case around July 2025.¹⁶ In the UC case, attorneys David A. Nacht and Fabiola A. Galguera were granted pro hac vice status in December 2025.¹⁷ The UW case is the only one where the Zhongs are still proceeding without a lawyer as of mid-2026.⁵

How the Universities Are Responding

Each school has hired experienced counsel and moved to dismiss. Cornell retained Bond, Schoeneck and King and filed a motion to dismiss on September 16, 2025; the Zhongs opposed on October 7 and Cornell replied on October 14. The court had not ruled as of May 2026.⁹

The University of Washington hired former Washington State Attorney General Robert McKenna of Orrick and said it was “reviewing the lawsuit” with “no additional comment while the legal process is ongoing.”¹¹ UW has argued that Zhong’s rejection was consistent with a “highly selective admissions process” and pointed to his out-of-state status. According to Nan Zhong, a judge rejected UW’s motion to stay the case, letting it move forward.¹⁸

The University of California retained WilmerHale, the same firm that defended Harvard in Students for Fair Admissions.¹² In the Michigan case, the university and individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint on July 11, 2025, with a hearing set for January 15, 2026.⁸

Where the Cases Stand Now

All four suits are active, but none has reached discovery or trial. Nan Zhong has noted publicly that fourteen months after the first filing, no case has advanced past the motion-to-dismiss stage.¹⁴ In the UC case, the court vacated the defendants’ response deadline in October 2025 and ordered the Zhongs to report on their efforts to retain counsel; both sides were still disputing a motion to amend the complaint as recently as March 2026.¹⁷

The Zhongs argue Stanley has “evergreen” standing because he never enrolled in college and so his admissions dispute has not been mooted. They continue to seek whistleblower information about the use of race in admissions and faculty hiring at each defendant school.¹²

1
ABC7 News. Stanley Zhong Google Software Engineer
2
Cornell Sun. Father and Son Sue Cornell Alleging Racial Discrimination in Admissions
3
The Campanile. Stanley Zhong Rejected From Universities Hired by Multinational Tech Company
4
CBS News. Stanley Zhong Google Software Engineer
5
The Daily UW. Student Sues UW for Racial Discrimination Turns to AI to Build Case
6
CourtListener. Zhong v. The Regents of University of CA
7
CourtListener. Zhong v. University of Washington
8
CourtListener. Zhong v. The Regents of the University of Michigan
9
CourtListener. Zhong v. Cornell University
10
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Zhong v. Cornell University
11
The College Fix. Whiz Kid With Near Perfect SAT Score Sues U Washington UMich Cornell Alleges Discrimination
12
Minding the Campus. Father and Son Challenge Four Universities Over Anti-Asian Admissions Discrimination
13
California Policy Center. Rejected by UC
14
SWORD. Students Who Oppose Racial Discrimination
15
KUOW. AI as Attorney This Student Is Using It to Sue UW Over Alleged Racial Discrimination
16
CourtListener. Zhong v. Cornell University – Parties
17
PACER Monitor. Zhong v. The Regents of University of CA
18
ABC7 News. Google Engineer Rejected Colleges Uses AI Sue UCs Other Universities Racial Discrimination