by Sharelle B. McNair
February 16, 2026
Whereas Harvard has refused to bow down, authorized specialists spotlight how the lawsuit having “nothing to do with defending the civil rights of any scholar.”
After the Division of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit in opposition to Harvard College over allegations that the varsity isn’t complying with the 2023 affirmative motion ban, authorized specialists are warning the Trump Administration of potential privateness hurdles forward, in accordance with The Harvard Crimson.
The Feb. 13 swimsuit may current violations of the Household Instructional Rights and Privateness Act (FERPA) – a federal legislation banning scholar data that forestall particular person candidates from being disclosed.
Because the DOJ is demanding applicant-level admissions information, akin to grades, standardized check scores, race, and inner evaluations, FERPA could possibly be violated when information factors are mixed, even after names are eliminated, as a result of this makes particular person college students identifiable.
Various authorized specialists are sounding the alarm, together with Vinay Harpalani, a College of New Mexico legislation professor, who says he could be stunned if the administration is profitable in its calls for. “That dangers explicit privateness issues there,” Harpalani mentioned.
“If the person information from a single applicant can all be linked — all the information, the grade, the check rating, their race, ethnicity, different options about them — then that applicant would possibly be capable of be recognized as a person. And that could possibly be problematic, that would run in violation of the FERPA.”
In accordance with The Hill, the DOJ, below the management of Lawyer Common Pam Bondi, claims the Ivy League establishment, which was on the forefront of the Supreme Court docket’s controversial reversal, has averted doc launch for over 10 months. Bondi says the swimsuit is a matter of wanting “higher from our nation’s academic establishments.”
Harvard has did not disclose the information we have to be sure that its admissions are freed from discrimination — we are going to proceed preventing to place advantage over DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] throughout America,” the AG mentioned.
Nonetheless, Jonathan D. Glater, a College of California, Berkeley legislation professor, says the division could hit some blocks since FERPA doesn’t give them authority to entry scholar admissions data as they aren’t a listed entity.
He continues to say that the DOJ could also be out of its league in relation to understanding the ins and outs of admissions choices and the problem of evaluating discretionary variables.
“Pupil personally identifiable info is protected by FERPA. The DOJ isn’t a listed entity, and this isn’t a part of a prison investigation, so I’m unsure how this works,” the legislation professor defined.
“The School doesn’t admit everybody with excellent check scores and ideal grades, for instance. Different components are at pla,y and the method is nuanced. I have no idea how nuanced a course of the DOJ is ready to tolerate.”
Whereas a Harvard spokesperson says the varsity “will proceed to defend itself in opposition to these retaliatory actions which have been initiated just because Harvard refused to give up its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights in response to illegal authorities overreach,” Boston College legislation professor Jonathan P. Feingold touched on the lawsuit having “nothing to do with defending the civil rights of any scholar.”
“This gambit on the a part of the federal authorities is a part of a much wider effort to cripple establishments’ capability to really have truthful admissions processes that take note of an entire vary of things past standardized check scores,” Feingold mentioned.
There could also be some fact to Feingold’s viewpoint. The most recent lawsuit is one in all a number of launched by President Donald Trump and his administration in opposition to Harvard. President Trump has launched authorized motion in opposition to the varsity and demanded that it pay a $1 billion positive, following a report from The New York Instances that his administration was stepping again from a money request in negotiations with the varsity.
He additionally took a significant blow in September 2025, when a choose dominated that the White Home’s $2.7 billion freeze on federal funding for Harvard was unconstitutional.
RELATED CONTENT: Minding Our Enterprise: From The Nile To Now—How Dr. Ben Constructed The Basis Of Fashionable Afrocentric Thought
