The law that permits the federal government to cancel these grants has less strict requirements than Prop 209. For admissions policies to be a justification here they'd need to be so incredibly flagrantly violating Prop 209 that it'd be a joke.

Under pressure, UCLA commissioned a UCLA professor (Robert Mare) to study the data and prepare a report.

You can read the full report here: https://sard.law/static/sard/pdf/Mare%20Report%202012.pdf#pa...

If you don't want to read the full report, one of the most interesting things is on page 67. It says that North Asians receive lower holistic scores, and African Americans receive higher holistic scores, than similarly situated applicants from other ethnic groups. And this when comparing like with like because (i) it's during 'Final Review' and (ii) Mare's model compared students who were otherwise alike (including on socioeconomic and hardship indicators).

He did a follow up a couple of years later, with newer data, and his findings were the same (although the numbers shifted a bit).

How did UCLA respond to this report? By issuing a press release saying all was good:

  The report confirms that the admissions process at UCLA honors academic achievement and prioritizes acceptance to applicants of exceptional academic accomplishment. Further, data suggest a full range of applicant academic and personal achievements are evaluated by the Comprehensive Review procedure. Professor Mare concludes that the Comprehensive Review ranking for UCLA freshman admissions functions in the manner intended by the faculty and the University. CUAS ...is satisfied with the quality, focus, and rigor of the study.