This Wednesday’s filing in Boston challenges a Trump administration directive that would require colleges and universities to report detailed admissions data tied to race and sex, as federal officials seek expanded oversight of how institutions handle race-related information in admissions decisions. The 17 Democratic state attorneys general said the requirement is unlawful and haphazard, and they argued it could leave institutions scrambling to meet a rushed timeline while exposing sensitive student information.
The administration’s policy traces to an August order by President Donald Trump, after he raised concerns that some colleges were using personal statements and other “proxies” to consider race. Trump said he views that approach as illegal discrimination, prompting federal Education Department efforts to track how universities use race-related factors in admissions.
What the memo requires, and what it could trigger
The court filing points to a memo that directs Education Secretary Linda McMahon to require colleges to report additional data “to provide adequate transparency into admissions.” Under the approach described in the memo, the National Center for Education Statistics would collect race and sex information for colleges’ applicants, admitted students and enrolled students.
The memo sets a federal due date of March 18 for the submissions, according to the AP report. It also requires the data to be disaggregated by race and sex and to be reported retroactively for the past seven years.
The memo also lays out enforcement consequences if schools do not comply, with McMahon directed to take action under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, a law governing eligibility for federal student financial aid, the report said. The coalition’s lawsuit argued that the administration’s approach would jeopardize student privacy and create operational and legal risk for institutions attempting to comply.
Plaintiffs: rushed timeline, unreliable data, privacy risks
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said the administration’s timeline was too compressed to produce accurate reporting. In a statement, Campbell called the administration’s actions “unlawful and haphazard,” adding that the effort threatened “the well-being of Massachusetts students and the prosperity of our colleges and universities.”
Campbell said “There is no way for institutions to reasonably deliver accurate data in the federal government’s rushed and arbitrary time frame,” and she said it was unfair for schools to face “fines, potential losses of funding, and baseless investigations” if they do not meet the request.
The plaintiffs also warned that colleges have data protection obligations to students, and that the administration’s expanded Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System demands would place those obligations at risk. The coalition argued the federal data collection could lead to individuals being “easily identified,” according to the AP description of the lawsuit’s allegations.
Education Department defends race-data push as transparency tool
Education Department spokesperson Ellen Keast defended the data collection as part of a government transparency effort, arguing that taxpayers deserve visibility into how federal funds are spent. Keast said in a statement that “American taxpayers invest over $100 billion into higher education each year and deserve transparency on how their dollars are being spent.”
Keast said the Department’s plan “will expand an existing transparency tool” and said the effort would show how universities take race into consideration in admissions. She also said the Department’s work would “expand an existing transparency tool to show how universities are taking race into consideration in admissions,” and she questioned what institutions expected to prevent by challenging the request.
Keast also framed the dispute as tied to the scope of federal oversight, adding: “What exactly are State AGs trying to shield universities from?” the AP report said.
Context after the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling
The lawsuit comes in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2023 that rejected affirmative action in admissions but said colleges may consider how race has shaped students’ lives if applicants share that information in their admissions essays. The administration’s August order and subsequent data-collection plan appear aimed at monitoring whether colleges use race-related information directly or through other means, after Trump said he was concerned about the use of personal statements and proxies.
The AP report also said the new policy is similar to parts of settlement agreements the government negotiated with Brown University and Columbia University, which reportedly restored federal research money in exchange for agreements to provide race-related admissions data. In those settlement terms described by the AP report, the universities agreed to be audited by the government and to release admissions statistics to the public.