A coalition of 17 states has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging new federal requirements that would require colleges and universities to submit expanded data about the race of applicants, admitted students, and enrolled students.
The lawsuit, led by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, alleges that the U.S. Department of Education unlawfully altered a key federal higher-education survey in a way that could place institutions at risk of violating privacy protections and reporting inaccurate information.
At the center of the dispute is the federal government’s effort to expand data collection through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), a nationwide survey administered by the National Center for Education Statistics.
States Challenge Data Collection Changes
According to the lawsuit, the Department of Education directed the statistical agency to collect detailed racial data on students applying to, being admitted to, and enrolling in colleges across the country.
The Democratic attorneys general argue that the department changed the survey requirements without following proper administrative procedures and without giving schools sufficient time to comply.
“This Administration’s unlawful and haphazard actions are threatening the wellbeing of Massachusetts students and the prosperity of our colleges and universities,” Campbell said in a statement announcing the legal action.
Under federal law, colleges must participate in IPEDS surveys to remain eligible for federal financial aid programs. The states claim the new data requirements effectively force institutions to comply quickly or risk losing access to federal funding streams.
The lawsuit further alleges that the policy could pressure universities to submit incomplete or unreliable information while potentially exposing sensitive student data.
Federal Officials Defend Transparency Effort
Education Department officials have defended the new requirements as a transparency measure aimed at understanding how race is considered in admissions decisions.
Department spokesperson Ellen Keast told reporters that taxpayers deserve insight into how federal education funds are used.
“American taxpayers invest over $100 billion into higher education each year and deserve transparency on how their dollars are being spent,” Keast said, adding that the expanded reporting would allow the public to see how universities factor race into admissions.
Former professional wrestling executive and current Education Secretary Linda McMahon previously argued that collecting such data would help federal officials assess whether colleges are discriminating against certain applicants.
According to McMahon, obtaining admissions data through legal proceedings has historically been slow and resource-intensive, making broader reporting requirements necessary.
Part of Wider DEI Policy Conflict
The lawsuit arrives amid a broader political and legal battle over diversity, equity, and inclusion policies.
Since returning to office, President Donald Trump has targeted DEI programs across government agencies, universities, and the private sector, arguing that such initiatives unfairly disadvantage white applicants.
State attorneys general opposing the policy argue the administration is attempting to expand federal authority to undermine diversity programs in higher education.
“Colleges and universities should not be forced to turn over massive amounts of sensitive student data to satisfy another witch hunt,” said Letitia James in a statement supporting the lawsuit.
Legal Stakes for Higher Education
Legal observers say the case could test the limits of federal authority over institutional data reporting requirements and student privacy protections.
If the courts side with the states, the ruling could restrict the federal government’s ability to impose new reporting obligations on universities without formal regulatory procedures.
Conversely, if the administration prevails, colleges nationwide may be required to collect and disclose more detailed admissions data tied to race — a development that could reshape ongoing debates about transparency, discrimination, and admissions policies.
The case is expected to move through federal court in the coming months.
