A federal lawsuit filed on Wednesday accuses the Trump administration of unlawfully pressuring universities and colleges across the country to disclose extensive collections of “sensitive student information.”

In August 2025, President Donald Trump issued a directive focused on monitoring the “consideration of race in higher education admissions.” On the same day, Education Secretary Linda McMahon announced a comprehensive reform in the way higher education institutions must submit student data to the federal government.

Historically, institutions have reported basic statistical data through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). However, following McMahon’s directive, schools are now compelled to submit data that is broken down by race, gender, GPA, test scores, income level, and academic program. This means that information is now more detailed, analyzing applicant pools, admitted cohorts, and enrolled cohorts at both undergraduate and specific graduate and professional levels.

In December 2025, these changes were implemented after a formal administrative procedure, with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) introducing the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (ACTS) to enhance the existing IPEDS framework.

According to the plaintiffs in their 43-page lawsuit, the new requirements are excessive and risk exposing students’ “highly personal information,” potentially compromising their identities. This, they argue, contravenes the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which dictates the conduct of administrative agencies and the basis for legal actions against them.

The lawsuit claims, “The IPEDS ACTS survey is unprecedented in its breadth, demanding a wide array of disaggregated data from the 2025-2026 academic year and the six preceding years. IPEDS has never before sought retroactive data, nor has it requested such a comprehensive set of disaggregated data. Additionally, the Department of Education has never enacted such a significant change to IPEDS so swiftly.”

That demand for institutions of higher education – in terms of breadth, scope, and the timeline involved – is gargantuan to the point of causing “harm” now and moving forward, the plaintiffs say.

“Standing alone, the sheer amount of data sought through the ACTS survey would place a considerable burden on [schools],” the lawsuit goes on. “Here, however, that burden is compounded through the expedited timeline which [schools] have to compile that data and the error-ridden and confusing process implemented by the Department of Education to collect it.”

And it’s not just the large scale of the new data demands that has upset the plaintiffs, including several states led in part by New York Attorney General Letitia James, over the new data collection demands.

On top of the administrative burden, the Trump administration is trying to turn “a trusted data source for universities, lawmakers, and the public” into a political weapon as part of the “focus on DEI [as] a policy goal,” according to the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs argue the defendants “seek to fundamentally change IPEDS, converting it from a reliable tool for methodical statistical reporting to a mechanism for law enforcement and the furthering of partisan policy aims.”

The lawsuit also alleges the “new IPEDS ACTS survey is not a data collection developed using rigorous statistical methodology; rather, it is a fishing expedition to obtain onerous, extra-court discovery on the admissions practices of IHEs across the country.”

These efforts violate multiple federal laws, the lawsuit insists

“The IPEDS ACTS survey is contrary to law, exceeds statutory authority, and failed to observe the procedure required by law,” the complaint goes on. “[The agency’s statistics-gathering sub-agencies] have statutory mandates, and neither is authorized to collect data to further partisan political ends, as the Defendants propose here. Second, the Paperwork Reduction Act sets forth multiple requirements for data collections by agencies. These requirements are mandated by statute and cannot be overcome by executive fiat.”

The plaintiffs argue that despite the OMB using the formal administrative process to push the new survey, the government effectively paid lip service to APA requirements without following the administrative rules required for such a “dramatic change.”

From the lawsuit, at length:

Whereas past changes to IPEDS data collection methods have undergone rigorous advance vetting to ensure they will not unduly burden IHEs, this dramatic overhaul of IPEDS occurred virtually overnight. At no time during the initial notice-and-comment period did the Defendants alert universities to the actual changes to IPEDS that would be sought. The survey ultimately implemented by Defendants evinces that they did not consider the reliance interests and concerns set forth in the many comments detailing just how onerous the contemplated changes to IPEDS would be.

In other words, the lawsuit claims the Trump administration glossed over the procedure to rush the new survey through and force it on institutions of higher education.

But, the lawsuit further argues, the threats are not empty.

“Completing IPEDS is mandated by statute, and educational institutions face hefty fines and other serious consequences, including potential loss of federal funding, if they fail to submit timely and complete data through IPEDS,” the lawsuit continues. “[Schools] face an untenable dilemma: quickly compiling data they typically would have years to collect and submit, all the while knowing that the data may suffer from inconsistencies given the haste with which it has been prepared and the lack of guidance from the Department of Education on what key definitions and data elements mean.”

The plaintiffs say the hasty implementation of the new survey has left schools “with the question of how to protect students’ privacy, at the same time that they face the risks of hefty fines and loss of federal funding.”

“The consequences from the Defendants’ sloppy implementation of the IPEDS ACTS survey are therefore severe: [schools] will face costly investigations based on unreliable data,” the filing goes on.

The three-count lawsuit seeks an injunction to nix the fast-approaching March 18 due date for the new IPEDS ACTS survey.

“Once again, this administration is trying to stretch the federal government’s authority to serve its own political agenda and target DEI initiatives,” James said in a statement announcing the litigation. “Colleges and universities should not be forced to turn over massive amounts of sensitive student data to satisfy another witch hunt. We are going to court to stop this unlawful mandate and protect institutions and students across the country.”