Federal judge slams trump admin's data grab on college admissions
A federal judge in Boston effectively halted the Trump administration’s last-ditch effort to force colleges and universities to hand over sensitive data on admissions practices, citing a “rushed and chaotic” rollout. The decision, a preliminary injunction granted Friday, throws a wrench into the administration’s attempt to scrutinize how institutions are handling race in admissions following the Supreme Court’s ruling against affirmative action.
The data demand: a premature pounce?
Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV sided with a coalition of 17 Democratic state attorneys general who argued that the federal government’s demand for data was premature and potentially violated student privacy. While acknowledging the government likely has the authority to collect such information, Saylor sharply criticized the 120-day deadline imposed by the Trump administration. “The 120-day deadline led directly to the failure of the National Center for Education Statistics to engage meaningfully with the institutions,” he wrote, a clear rebuke of the agency’s process.
The administration’s move, stemming from August concerns about colleges using proxies for race in admissions—personal essays, extracurricular activities—had been met with resistance from universities worried about unwarranted investigations and the burden of compiling the requested data. Michelle Pascucci, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, argued the effort was aimed at “uncovering unlawful practices” in a haphazard manner, creating significant problems for institutions.
Echoes of past settlements, new legal battles
The Education Department defended its request, asserting that taxpayers deserve transparency in how federal funds are spent. The policy mirrors agreements reached with Brown University and Columbia University, where institutions agreed to provide data on applicant race, GPA, and test scores, along with government audits and public release of admissions statistics. But the current situation differs significantly; the scope is broader, the timeline tighter, and the legal challenge more robust.
Harvard University, meanwhile, finds itself embroiled in a separate lawsuit with the Education Department, accused of refusing to provide admissions records. The university claims it has been compliant with the Supreme Court’s ruling and has been responding to government requests. On Monday, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights demanded Harvard’s compliance within 20 days, threatening referral to the Justice Department. This escalating pressure highlights the administration’s unwavering commitment to policing college admissions practices, even as courts push back.
Linda McMahon, the Education Secretary, had initially mandated the data submission by March 18, requiring disaggregation by race and sex and retroactive reporting for the past seven years. Failure to comply could trigger action under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, potentially jeopardizing federal financial aid for affected institutions.
The judge's decision isn't a final verdict, but it effectively pauses the data collection effort, leaving the future of this policy—and the administration’s broader campaign to reshape higher education—in considerable doubt. The legal battle promises to be protracted, and the implications for universities and students remain significant.