- Seventeen Democratic state attorneys general are suing the Trump administration regarding its college race data collection policy.
- The Education Department requires higher education institutions to demonstrate race is not an admissions considerations.
- The litigation is the latest chapter in the administration's ongoing effort to remove race from college admissions.
A Trump administration directive designed to ensure that U.S. colleges and universities receiving federal assistance are not considering race in admissions is heading to the courts.
Last August, Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon ordered the National Center for Education Statistics to begin collecting enhanced data from higher institutions to ensure race-based preferences were not being used in their admissions processes.
Those actions were prompted by President Donald Trump’s reported concerns that colleges and universities were using personal statements and other elements of the admissions process to consider race — a practice he considers illegal.
Colleges and universities are now required to report several year’s worth of comprehensive admissions data disaggregated by race and sex.
The data, according to the Education Department, should include “quantitative measures of applicants’ and admitted students’ academic achievements such as standardized test scores, GPAs and other applicant characteristics.”
And McMahon put schools on the clock. The data is reportedly due by March 18.
“From the start of this administration, the president has worked to ensure that colleges and universities that take advantage of federal funding prioritize merit and prepare students for rewarding careers that advance American success,” wrote McMahon in an Aug. 7, 2025, DOE memo.
“Improving transparency in admissions is a major step toward rededicating our universities to merit and excellence.”
McMahon also ordered the National Center for Education Statistics to develop “a rigorous audit process” to ensure that data being collected from the schools is accurate and consistent.
In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of affirmative action in admissions but said colleges may still consider how race has shaped students’ lives if applicants share that information in their admissions essays, according to The Associated Press.
Democrats litigating the DOE’s admissions/data collection policy
On Wednesday, a collection of 17 Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in federal court in Boston challenging the DOE’s admissions/data requirements.
“This administration’s unlawful and haphazard actions are threatening the well-being of Massachusetts students and the prosperity of our colleges and universities,” Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said in a statement to The Associated Press.
“There is no way for institutions to reasonably deliver accurate data in the federal government’s rushed and arbitrary time frame — and it is unfair for schools to be threatened with fines, potential losses of funding, and baseless investigations should they not fulfill the administration’s request.”
The lawsuit argues the “sheer amount of data” sought by the DOE places heavy burdens on colleges, The Hill reported.
The blue states add that the reporting requirements are costly and will be used as a tool by the Trump administration to launch politically motivated investigations. The attorneys general of the states also argue the high demand of information will make it difficult for schools to produce usable data to the government on such short notice.
“The Trump administration is on a fishing expedition — demanding unprecedented amounts of data from our colleges and universities under the guise of enforcing civil rights law,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta in The Hill report.
The multistate lawsuit against the Trump administration prompted a response from DOE spokesperson Ellen Keast:
“American taxpayers invest over $100 billion into higher education each year and deserve transparency on how their dollars are being spent,” Keast said in a statement. “The (DOE’s) efforts will expand an existing transparency tool to show how universities are taking race into consideration in admissions.
“What exactly are state AGs trying to shield universities from?”
The states involved in the lawsuit are California, New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin and Washington.
The new DOE admissions data policy is similar to parts of recent settlement agreements the government negotiated with Brown University and Columbia University, restoring their federal research money, according to The Associated Press.
Those Ivy League schools agreed to give the government data on the race, grade-point average and standardized test scores of applicants, admitted students and enrolled students. The schools also agreed to be audited by the government and to release admissions statistics to the public.
Ongoing actions: Removing race from college admissions considerations
Wednesday’s lawsuit is the latest development in the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to remove race from being an admissions consideration across higher education in the U.S.
“We will not allow institutions to blight the dreams of students by presuming that their skin color matters more than their hard work and accomplishments,” said McMahon in an August DOE release.
“The Trump administration will ensure that meritocracy and excellence once again characterize American higher education.”
In March of 2025, the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights announced it was investigating 45 American universities — including the University of Utah — for allegedly using “racial preferences and stereotypes in education programs and activities.”
At the time, the DOE said the University of Utah and 44 other schools had violated the Civil Rights Act by partnering with the Ph.D. Project — a nonprofit that helps students from underrepresented groups get advanced business degrees.
The DOE argued that the Ph.D. Project was an organization “that purports to provide doctoral students with insights into obtaining a Ph.D. and networking opportunities — but limits eligibility based on the race of participants.”
The University of Utah has since settled with the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights and terminated its membership/partnership with the Ph.D. Project.
And last year, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the country’s five service academies to offer admission to applicants based “exclusively on merit.”
Nixing all elements of affirmative action, wrote Hegseth in a memo to senior military leadership, ensures “only the most qualified candidates” are admitted, trained and commissioned to lead “the finest fighting force in history.”
“Selecting anyone but the best erodes lethality, our warfighting readiness, and undercuts the culture of excellence in our Armed Forces.”
Hegseth’s orders followed a federal judge’s ruling in 2024 that the U.S. Naval Academy could continue considering race in its admissions process.
In that case, the judge found that military cohesion and other national security factors mean the school should not be subjected to the same standards as civilian universities, Navy Times reported.
Attorneys for the academy had argued that prioritizing diversity in the military makes it stronger, more effective and more widely respected.
But lawyers challenging the academy’s admissions practices at that time countered that prioritizing minority candidates is unfair for qualified white applicants — adding that cohesion should arise from other sources such as training and command structure.