A federal lawsuit filed on March 11, 2026, accuses the Trump administration of unlawfully demanding that U.S. colleges and universities submit vast amounts of disaggregated student data—including race, sex, GPA, test scores, income, and program details—as part of tracking race considerations in admissions. Plaintiffs, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James and including several states, argue this violates the Administrative Procedure Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and privacy protections by turning a longstanding statistical tool into a politically motivated “fishing expedition.”
Policy Background
In August 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum on race in higher education admissions, prompting Education Secretary Linda McMahon to require granular reporting beyond the traditional Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). The Office of Management and Budget formalized the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (ACTS) in December 2025, demanding retroactive data for 2025-2026 and six prior years—broken down by applicant pools, admits, and enrollees.
Key Allegations
- Unprecedented Scope and Burden: IPEDS has never sought such detailed, retroactive data so quickly, overwhelming schools with confusing instructions and tight deadlines (e.g., March 18, 2026).
- Privacy Risks: The survey could expose “highly personal information” and identities, lacking rigorous statistical safeguards.
- Political Weaponization: Critics say it targets DEI initiatives without proper notice-and-comment vetting, bypassing statutory limits on agencies like the National Center for Education Statistics.
- Harsh Penalties: Non-compliance risks fines, funding loss, or investigations based on rushed, unreliable data.
Legal Claims and Relief Sought
The 43-page, three-count complaint charges the process as arbitrary, exceeding authority, and procedurally flawed—rushed “overnight” without addressing public comments on burdens. It seeks an injunction to halt the March 18 deadline. James called it a “witch hunt” stretching federal power for partisan ends. Defendants haven’t responded yet.
