The University of Southern California (USC) canceled a scheduled California gubernatorial debate with less than 24 hours' notice after objections that the selection process excluded all candidates of color from the lineup. The debate, co-hosted by USC Dornsife Center for the Political Future and ABC/KABC Los Angeles, was set to take place at Bovard Auditorium before being called off on Monday.

USC had defended the candidate selection methodology developed by USC Professor Christian Grose, describing it as a 'data-driven candidate viability formula based on extensive research' that factored in both polling performance and fundraising, with greater weight given to polling. The formula produced a debate lineup that included Republicans Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and commentator Steve Hilton, alongside Democrats Tom Steyer, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, former Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Eric Swalwell.

Former Biden Health and Human Services Secretary and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra sent a letter to USC President Beong-Soo Kim alleging 'election rigging,' stating: 'USC goes to great lengths to justify its exclusionary candidate formula. But you can't escape the detestable outcome: you disqualified all of the candidates of color from participating while you invited a white candidate who has NEVER polled higher than some of the candidates of color, including me.' Becerra's polling has been reported at approximately 3 percent, within the statistical margin of error of several polls.

Following pressure from advocates and candidates who called the process racist and rigged, USC attempted to expand the number of debate participants but said it was unable to reach an agreement with co-sponsor KABC. In a statement, USC announced: 'We recognize that concerns about the selection criteria for tomorrow's gubernatorial debate have created a significant distraction from the issues that matter to voters. Unfortunately, USC and KABC have not been able to reach an agreement on expanding the number of candidates at tomorrow's debate. As a result, USC has made the difficult decision to cancel tomorrow's debate and will look for other opportunities to educate voters on the candidates and issues.'

Becerra responded to the cancellation on social media, declaring: 'We fought. We won! … Thank you to everyone who stood up, raised hell and demanded justice. Never give up when you're fighting for fairness!'

The cancellation drew criticism from USC scholars who had defended Grose's methodology. A statement from faculty read: 'Attacks and insinuations from members of the political classes include completely baseless allegations of election-rigging, inconsistency, bias and data manipulation. These are harmful character assassinations, not substantive debate.' Professor Morris Levy of the USC chapter of Heterodox Academy wrote that USC's decision sent an 'unmistakable' message that the university was 'allowing concerns and a public distraction to override its own institutional conviction that the selection formula was data-driven and backed by research.'

The USC Open Dialogue Project, The Center for the Political Future, and ABC7 each issued separate statements in defense of the original process following the cancellation.

The broader context includes a California gubernatorial race in which two Republicans, Bianco and Hilton, currently lead in polling. California law sends the top two vote-getters in a primary to a runoff regardless of party affiliation. The state has a history of voter-approved measures banning affirmative action in public institutions, though California universities have continued to face allegations of applying racial criteria in admissions decisions.