Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Administration Lawsuit Seeking Harvard Admissions Records

A federal judge in Boston on Monday dismissed the Trump administration's lawsuit seeking applicant-level admissions records from Harvard University, ruling that the Justice Department had not shown it completed the procedural steps required before suing. U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun dismissed the case without prejudice, so it can be refiled. The department sued in February, saying Harvard had slow-walked and thwarted a federal civil rights review through delays and missed deadlines. It said it wanted the records to ensure the school had stopped using affirmative action, and a similar Education Department inquiry was later added. In his 10-page decision, Joun wrote that an agency must tell a recipient it is not complying and determine that voluntary compliance cannot be secured. He said a deadline and a threat to sue alone do not necessarily meet that test. He added that the ruling does not decide whether Harvard discriminated or whether it may eventually have to provide the data. Harvard called the demands excessive and part of an ongoing campaign against it, and said its admissions comply with federal law.

The New Republic, on the left, calls the suit an "extreme" attempt to "shake down" Harvard and sets it beside Trump's $1 billion demand, the education "compact" and an antisemitism suit dismissed in August. It also relays Harvard's rebuttal. The Guardian is more procedural, but adds Harvard's data showing Black enrollment at 9.3% for the class of 2030, down from 18% for the class of 2027. Fox News, on the right, leads with the dismissal leaving "the door open" to a future challenge. It quotes Joun saying the government may cure the deficiency and describes the probe as examining whether Harvard still considers race. All sides agree on the judge, the procedural grounds and the lack of a ruling on the merits. They differ on context: pressure on Harvard versus the chance of refiling. Newsweek, among alternative sources, is similar to Fox, though it calls the ruling a "setback" and notes that Joun is a Biden appointee. Common Dreams covers a separate voter-data case.