A federal judge on Monday threw out the Trump administration’s lawsuit demanding Harvard University’s admissions records. He ruled that the government had not shown it completed the steps required before suing. The dismissal is without prejudice, so the government can try again.
U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun of the District of Massachusetts ruled on Harvard’s motion to dismiss the Justice Department’s amended complaint. The Education Department’s separate records request was added to the case after it was filed in February. The government sought applicant-level admissions data as part of Title VI reviews of whether Harvard still considers race after the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
What the Judge Found
Title VI regulations require an agency to determine that voluntary compliance cannot be secured, and to tell the recipient what action it will take, before enforcing in court. Joun found the Justice Department had not shown it did so. He wrote that “A deadline and a threat to sue, standing alone, do not necessarily demonstrate compliance” with that process. The complaint does not allege that the department told Harvard litigation would follow if it did not comply, he said, and “this failure is dispositive at this stage.”
The Education Department fell short on its own regulation, which is evaluated separately. Joun said it had not adequately shown it took the further steps required before referring the matter for court enforcement. Those include renewed efforts to persuade the university after a notice. A related breach-of-contract claim was also dismissed without prejudice.
What the Ruling Leaves Open
Joun stressed that his decision is narrow. It does not determine whether Harvard discriminated, whether the agencies may lawfully seek applicant-level data, or whether Harvard must ultimately provide it. He did not rule on Harvard’s arguments that the requests were overbroad or that the suit was retaliatory. He wrote that those questions “remain open.”
The Competing Arguments
The administration argued Harvard was withholding information needed to assess its admissions practices. Harvard said the requests were overly broad and would expose sensitive information on hundreds of thousands of applicants, including personal essays. It said it had already provided “thousands of pages of documents.” Harvard also argued, per CNN, that the suit was filed to retaliate after it refused demands to overhaul its governance, hiring and academic programs. It noted the case came after President Donald Trump announced in early February that he was ending settlement talks and wanted $1 billion in damages.
Reaction
Education Department spokesperson Ellen Keast said in a statement, “When the government asked for admissions data to determine whether Harvard has changed its ways, the school refused and a Democrat-appointed judge is now shielding Harvard from accountability.”
Justice Department spokesperson Kiersten Pels said the court dismissed the case on “a narrow pleading question and invited the United States to amend.” She added, “We will do exactly that.” A Harvard spokesperson did not immediately respond to Politico’s request for comment.
The ruling adds to Harvard’s string of court wins in its fight with the administration. The university has also won rulings against efforts to terminate more than $2 billion in grants, to block it from hosting international students and to sue it over alleged harassment of Jewish and Israeli students.
