In brief
U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun in Boston rejected a lawsuit from the former Trump administration seeking detailed admissions records from Harvard University. The judge cited insufficient notification of the university and failure to follow required administrative steps. The dismissal is without prejudice, leaving the underlying investigation into alleged racial discrimination unresolved.
On November 3, 2026, U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun in Boston dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Trump administration that sought Harvard University’s applicant‑level admissions records in a federal investigation of alleged racial discrimination. The case reached the District of Massachusetts, where the judge ruled the federal government failed to meet basic administrative requirements before filing the suit.
The lawsuit, filed in 2024, was part of the Justice Department’s effort to examine whether Harvard complied with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The DOJ requested detailed academic scores, essays, race and ethnicity data, and admissions decisions for every applicant the university evaluated during the period in question.
According to Anadolu Agency reporting, the DOJ’s request was designed to probe the university’s admissions practices for potential racial bias. The agency alleged that Harvard’s selection process favored white and Asian applicants while limiting opportunities for Black and Hispanic students.
In his written decision, Judge Joun emphasized that federal agencies must observe statutory and regulatory procedures before seeking judicial enforcement of administrative information demands. He found the DOJ did not sufficiently demonstrate that it had notified Harvard about specific compliance failures or that it intended to pursue enforcement measures before filing the lawsuit.
The judge also addressed the Department of Education’s role in the case. He noted that the department failed to show it had completed the voluntary‑compliance steps required by law prior to turning the matter over to the courts.
Joun dismissed the case “without prejudice,” meaning the Trump administration may file a new action after correcting the procedural shortcomings identified by the court. The decision does not resolve whether the university must ultimately provide the requested records or whether the government’s underlying claims are legally justified.
The ruling represents a procedural setback for the former administration’s push to compel Harvard to disclose admissions data. The DOJ and the Department of Education must now address the administrative lapses before any future suit can move forward in the federal courts.
While the dismissal clears the court’s docket of this particular case, it leaves the investigation into Harvard’s admissions practices in limbo. The DOJ continues to threaten additional legal action should it believe its procedural bar has been met.
The lawsuit and subsequent dismissal highlight the tension between federal oversight of higher‑education admissions and universities’ privacy obligations. It underlines the strict procedural safeguard that federal agencies must observe to obtain court‑ordered disclosure of sensitive applicant information.
For students, scholars, and policy observers, the case serves as a reminder that federal investigations into institutional fairness can be delayed by bureaucratic missteps, even as they probe potentially unlawful discrimination in admissions.
