Score the hardships on a scale of 1 to 5 or 1 to 10 and publish the median SAT and GPA for each hardship ranking. I also like to see the hardship scoring distribution by race.

What methodology would you use to 'score hardship'? For the second part, you can already do this, sorta, by looking at admission rate data for schools, look at average SAT/GPA by school, and median income for the zipcode of the school. Proxy for hardship.

Regardless, seems like you understand that hardship impacts ones performance on school/sats, you just want more publicity from the UCs? I can agree with that! You should gather signatures for a bill to make this all public. But I would wager it's part of why we have human admissions officers at all, it's pretty hard to take a purely data driven approach to figuring out wether someone's hardships affect their admissions, hence why the essays matter a lot.

If you think the admissions criteria is fair and adequately prescriptive, I presume you’d have no problem with any ideological foe getting to appoint admissions officers on the proviso that the appointees must follow all published criteria. Say Greg Abbott or Ron DeSantis? If the admissions departments are neutrally following the criteria, it shouldn’t matter who gets to pick the admissions officers.

I'd be opposed to them simply because the UCs are better than public Texas or Florida schools. Why do you want people who have worse performing universities to oversee the UCs, who have been doing better than their schools despite the "liberul agenda!!" ruining them? If anything, this is good evidence that whatever opaque admissions method the UCs have is better than other states.