Fact check: Did any investigation find evidence of Donald Trump cheating on his SATs?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, no formal investigation has found evidence of Donald Trump cheating on his SATs. However, there have been significant allegations and calls for investigation:

• University of Pennsylvania professors have demanded investigations into allegations that Trump paid someone else to take his SAT exam, which would constitute fraudulent admission to Wharton ^{[1] [2]}
• The University of Pennsylvania rejected these demands for investigation, citing that the alleged incident occurred too far in the past ^{[3] [1]}
• Multiple family members have made allegations: Trump's niece Mary Trump alleged in her book that he paid someone to take his SATs for him ^{[4] [5]}, and his sister Maryanne Trump Barry reportedly believes he paid a friend to take the test ^[6]
• Michael Cohen alleged that Trump ordered him to threaten schools not to release his grades or SAT scores, though this doesn't constitute direct evidence of cheating ^{[7] [8]}

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question focuses narrowly on formal investigations finding evidence, but omits several important contextual elements:

• The distinction between allegations and proven evidence - while no investigation has found evidence, this is partly because the University of Pennsylvania refused to conduct an investigation ^{[3] [1]}
• The source credibility question - the allegations come from family members who have had public disputes with Trump, including Mary Trump who filed a lawsuit claiming the family cheated her of millions ^[9]
• The institutional response - Penn's rejection of investigation demands could be viewed either as protecting student privacy or as avoiding potential embarrassment to the institution, which would benefit from maintaining the reputation of its notable alumni
• The timing factor - the university's stated reason for rejecting investigation was the passage of time, not the lack of merit in the allegations ^{[3] [1]}

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question is technically accurate but potentially misleading in its framing:

• It implies that lack of investigative findings equals lack of evidence - however, the absence of formal investigation findings is largely due to institutional refusal to investigate rather than thorough investigation yielding no evidence ^{[3] [1]}
• The question's narrow focus may lead readers to conclude there are no credible allegations, when in fact multiple sources, including family members, have made specific claims ^{[6] [4] [5]}
• It doesn't acknowledge the evidentiary limitations - the allegations involve events from decades ago where direct evidence would be difficult to obtain, and key institutions have refused to cooperate with potential investigations ^{[7] [8]}

The framing could benefit those who wish to dismiss the allegations entirely, while potentially misleading those seeking to understand the full scope of claims and institutional responses surrounding this issue.