Skip to main content

AAUP Litigation

The legal office works on affirmative litigation whereby AAUP seeks to advance AAUP principles through the courts. Below is a list of case summaries; use the links to jump ahead on the page for additional information and status updates.

 

AAUP and Partners Challenge Executive Order Targeting DEI in Federal Contracting

On April 20, 2026, the AAUP joined the AAUP chapter at University of Maryland, College Park, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, and the National Association of Minority Contractors in filing a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s executive order targeting equal opportunity and inclusion efforts among federal contractors. The March 26, 2026, order broadly condemns initiatives related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and incorrectly asserts that these efforts violate federal law and ethical standards. This suit continues AAUP’s opposition to the repeated attempts by the administration to suppress lawful speech and dismantle longstanding equal opportunity practices. 

The stakes for higher education are significant. Many AAUP members rely on federal contracts to support their research and livelihoods, and most benefit indirectly through institutional funding structures such as overhead and grant support. Universities themselves are heavily dependent on federal contracts and subcontracts, meaning that the order’s effects would ripple across the academic workforce.

The lawsuit argues that the executive order is unlawful because it violates First Amendment rights to free speech and association, imposes unconstitutional conditions on the receipt of federal funds, and exceeds the executive branch’s authority under the False Claims Act and Procurement Act. Plaintiffs seek preliminary and permanent injunctive relief to block the order, along with a declaration that it is unlawful and unconstitutional. 

“This executive order is a direct attack on academic freedom and the First Amendment, designed to coerce silence by threatening faculty, students, and federal partners who confront the realities of race and discrimination,” said Todd Wolfson, president of the AAUP. The complaint further alleges that the order reflects a broader effort to compel federal contractors and subcontractors to comply with the administration’s stance on DEI by leveraging the threat of lost federal funding, permanent blacklisting, and even civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance, effectively using federal contracting power to impose ideological conformity on higher education institutions and its partners.

Read the full complaint here. 

 

AAUP Challenges Trump Administration’s Gold Card Visa Scheme

On February 3, 2026, the AAUP sued the federal government to challenge its creation of a new immigration scheme known as the “Gold Card,” which encourages wealthy individuals or corporations to make large payments to the government in exchange for expedited consideration for employment-based immigrant visas. The program treats a payment of $1 million (or $2 million by a corporation) as evidence of eligibility for highly selective visa categories, traditionally reserved for individuals who demonstrate extraordinary or exceptional ability in their field. 

The lawsuit argues that the Gold Card program is unlawful because it exceeds the executive branch’s authority, violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, and was implemented without required public notice or comment under the Administrative Procedure Act. Congress—not federal agencies—sets immigration eligibility criteria, visa caps, and priority rules, and the government cannot displace those rules with a wealth-based shortcut. Plaintiffs seek a court order declaring the program illegal and halting its implementation to ensure that visas are awarded based on statutory criteria rather than the ability to pay. We are currently awaiting the government's reply. American Association of University Professors v. Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS)  (D.D.C.), Case No. 1:26-cv-00300.

Read the complaint here.

 

Suit Opposing EEOC Subpoena for Private Records of Jewish Faculty and Students at Penn

The national AAUP, alongside AAUP–Penn, joined a coalition of Jewish students and scholars to intervene in a Trump administration lawsuit seeking the University of Pennsylvania to disclose the private information of its Jewish faculty and students. 

Current Status: On April 27, a federal court a issued a stay in the ongoing litigation between the EEOC and the University of Pennsylvania. While the appeal is pending, Penn is not required to hand over the names of employees who are members of on-campus Jewish organizations to the federal government. The court found that releasing the names would cause "irreparable harm," as such  disclosure could not be undone. We will continue to oppose the Trump administration’s attacks on academic freedom and freedom of association and to advocate for faculty and students to learn and organize without fear of government surveillance or retaliation. EEOC. v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania (E.D. Pa.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06502. 

More Information:

 

Challenge to Unlawful Funding Cuts at Harvard

The national AAUP and our Harvard chapter filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Trump administration from demanding that Harvard University restrict speech and restructure its core operations or else face the cancellation of $8.7 billion in federal funding for the university and its affiliated hospitals. American Association of University Professors - Harvard Faculty Chapter v. Department of Justice (D. Mass.) Case No. 1:25-cv-10910.

Harvard University subsequently filed suit and the cases have been consolidated. Factual discovery and briefing concluded and the court held a hearing for July 21, 2025. 

Current Status: On December 18, 2025, the Trump administration announced their intention to appeal the decision made by Judge Burroughs.

On September 3, 2025, a federal judge agreed with us and with the Harvard administration that the Trump administration violated the Constitution, the Civil Rights Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act by demanding that Harvard restrict speech and restructure core operations or else face the cancellation of billions in federal funding for the university and its affiliated hospital.

In her ruling, US District Judge Allison Burroughs found that the administration’s actions, which included freezing and canceling more than $2 billion in research grants, violated the First Amendment rights of Harvard and of Harvard’s faculty and amounted to “retaliation, unconstitutional conditions, and unconstitutional coercion.” Her ruling vacates the government’s funding freeze and permanently blocks it from using similar reasoning to deny grants to Harvard in the future.

More Information:

 

Suit over Trump Policy of Arresting and Threatening to Deport Students and Faculty for Lawful Speech

The AAUP, with the Middle Eastern Studies Association and several AAUP chapters, filed suit seeking to block the Trump administration from carrying out large-scale arrests, detentions, and deportations of noncitizen students and faculty members for ideological reasons (typically because of pro-Palestinian speech). American Association of University Professors v. Rubio (D. Mass.) Case No. 1:25-cv-10685

Current Status: In a landmark decision issued on September 30, 2025, a federal court ruled that the Trump administration, as part of a broad assault on our civil rights, violated the First Amendment. On January 22, 2026, the court issued a remedial order finding that the policy violated the First Amendment and Administrative Procedure Act, and accordingly vacated the policy. 

The order is now moving through the First Circuit Court of Appeals. In February, the government filed its own notice of appeal and a motion for a partial stay of the remedies order. In response, the AAUP and MESA filed a notice of cross-appeal seeking further relief in its challenge to the Trump Administration’s ideological deportation policy. We are currently awaiting further proceedings in the First Circuit. 

More Information:

 

Challenge to Unlawful Threats of Funding Cuts at University of California

On September 16, the AAUP and a broad coalition of labor unions filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the Trump administration from continuing to use threats of federal funding cuts to coerce the University of California (UC) into suppressing free speech and academic freedom. Democracy Forward and Altshuler Berzon LLP are representing the coalition of labor unions in the matter. The complaint describes how the government’s actions against the UC “follow a Trump administration playbook that has already succeeded in undermining free speech and academic freedom” domestically, and echoes one employed by autocratic movements globally. American Association of University Professors v. Trump  (N.D. Cal.)  Case No. 3:25-cv-07864

Current Status: In a major ruling issued on November 14, 2025, a federal court in the Northern District of California granted a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration’s campaign to coerce the University of California into ideological conformity—a move that the court recognized as a grave threat to academic freedom and free speech. While the injunction does not yet resolve the entire case, it blocks the most coercive elements of the Administration’s playbook as the case proceeds on the merits. 

More information:

 

Challenge to $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee

The AAUP is a plaintiff with a coalition of labor unions, religious organizations, and others in a lawsuit seeking to block Trump’s proclamation imposing a fee of $100,000 on employers for each new H-1B visa petition. Global Nurse Force v. Noem, (N.D. Cal.) Case No. 3:25-cv-08454.


Challenge to Anti-Diversity Executive Orders

The AAUP was a plaintiff in a case seeking to prevent the Trump administration from using federal grants and contracts as leverage to force colleges and universities to end all diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, whether federally funded or not, and from terminating any “equity-related” federal grants or contracts. Nat’l Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Ed. v. Trump (D. Md.), Case No. 1:25-cv-00333-ABA, (Fourth Circuit Case No. 25-1189). The AAUP initially won a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the executive orders by the use of certification and termination requirements for grantees. In 2026, the Fourth Circuit court of appeals vacated the initial preliminary injunction granted by the district court and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Current Status: On June 30, 2026, the US District Court of Maryland closed this case based on our notice of voluntarily dismissal. Plaintiffs brought this case to challenge Trump’s 2025 anti-DEI executive orders. In order to defend their legality, the government significantly narrowed the scope and impact of the executive orders. Most importantly, they represented that the orders are not themselves binding, do not apply to the use of non-federal funds, and only prohibit activity that is currently illegal under anti-discrimination laws, and that there is diversity work that would not run afoul of the orders. Based on these representations from the administration, the court of appeals rejected our challenge to the orders themselves but left open the door for future challenges to specific instances of DEI cuts made under the orders. Thus, while we did not win the preliminary injunction on appeal, we consider this suit a victory because it weakened the anti-DEI orders. As the Trump administration continues to find new ways to attack DEI, we will continue to challenge those attacks in defense of academic freedom. 

 More Information:


Challenge to Unlawful Funding Cuts at Columbia

The AAUP and the AFT sued the Trump administration on behalf of our members for unlawfully cutting off $400 million in federal funding for crucial public health research in an attempt to force Columbia University to surrender its academic independence. American Association of University Professors v. United States Department of Justice (S.D.N.Y.) Case No. 1:25-cv-02429.

Current Status: We filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. The district court denied the injunction and dismissed the case. The AAUP filed an appeal to the Second Circuit.

More Information:

 

Suit Over Mass Termination of Science Grants

The AAUP and allies representing educators and researchers filed a legal challenge to the recent mass termination of grants by the National Science Foundation (NSF), a move that threatens American innovation, scientific leadership, economic strength, and national defense, American Association of Physics Teachers, Inc. v. National Science Foundation, (D.D.C.) Case No. 1:25-cv-01923.

Current Status: A judge dismissed our claims concerning past cuts to NSF grant funding and allowed our claims for the potential loss of NSF funding to survive. We continue to pursue prospective claims challenging the NSF’s change in priorities.

More Information: 

 

Challenge to the Trump Administration’s Attempt to Dismantle the US Department of Education

The AAUP is a plaintiff in this case that challenges the administration’s unlawful effort to dismantle the department and seeks to halt mass layoffs that would decimate crucial services that the department provides across the country. Somerville Public Schools v. Trump (D. Mass.) Case No. 1:25-cv-10677 (First Circuit Case No. 25-1500)

Current status: On March 22, we won a preliminary injunction that halted the layoffs and ordered the employees reinstated. The administration appealed and filed an emergency motion to stay the preliminary injunction. The US Supreme Court stayed implementation of the injunction until the conclusion of the litigation, allowing the layoffs to continue. AAUP is continuing to fight this case in the lower courts.

More Information: