The Trump administration faces a growing number of demands

President Donald Trump’s plans to reduce the Federal Work Force; take energetic measures against programs of diversity, equity and inclusion; And the draft spending has faced the rapid associations of higher education, students, legal defense organizations and universities, and have resorted to the courts to seek relief.

Until now, federal judges have temporarily prevented the Elon Musk government efficiency team from accessing student financial aid data and blocked national health institutes to limit payments for costs indirectly related to research. In other places, legal challenges blocked a freezing in federal subsidies and loans and prevented the consumer financial protection office from leaving employees.

The demands are moving through the courts at a dizzying pace. So here is the latest about some of the key demands related to the education in which we follow Within the upper edition. We will update the tracker as necessary, so consult the updates again.

Challenging access to Doge data

Presented after the news that the officials of the Government’s efficiency department had accessed confidential data from students and borrowing, This demand seeks to stop the illegal dissemination of personal and financial information. The records of the Department of Education contain confidential data for millions of students. Department officials have said that Dege has access to all data, but it is not clear why this data is used. The case is supervised by the Federal District Court in Washington, DC (read the complaint here.

The latest: More recently, a judge prevented the Doge team from accessing students’ financial aid data until at least February 17. A hearing was held on February 14 on the motion of the plaintiffs for a temporary restriction order, and the judge is taking the matter under advice. The federal government has submitted since then statements contour The access of Doge employees and the training they have received.

Medical universities demand above the rate

Several postgraduate and professionals school associations sued the Trump administration on February 10 for a plan to reduce billions of reimbursements to universities. That plan is the issue of two other demands on this list. The lawsuit, filed at the United States District Court in Massachusetts, seeks to revoke the proposed cuts, arguing the change violated federal subsidy regulations and administrative law. (Read the complaint here.

• Lawsuit: Association of American Medical Colleges v. National Health Institutes
• Plaintiffs: The Association of American Medical Colleges, the American Association of Pharmacy Colleges, the Association of Public Health Schools and Programs, the Boston Teaching Hospitals Inc. Conference and the Association of the Greater New York Hospital
• DEMANDED: He National Health Institutes, Director of Interim NIH Dr. Matthew Mempo, Department of Health and Human Services, and interim secretary of HHS Dr. Dorothy Fink

The latest: On February 10, Judge Angel Kelley issued a national order at the national level that blocked the policy change as effect. This annulment of a previous temporary restriction order that had previously been issued on February 10, but was only applied to the 22 states demanded. (More information about that demand below.) A combined audience to address the three demands related to NIH rates cut has been established for February 21. The hearing will determine whether an extension of the restriction order must be granted, as well as the next steps in the litigation.

Blue states challenge rate cutting

This was the first of the three demands filed on February 10 that challenged the attempt of the Trump administration to restrict the use of NIH subsidies on the indirect costs of the investigation, arguing that if the change happens, “the edge work of institutions to cure and treat human disease to stop. ” Universities warned of judicial presentations of operating chaos and jobs as universities conform to immediate financial losses. (Read the complaint here.

• Lawsuit: Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. National Health Institutes
• The plaintiffs: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin
• DEMANDED: The Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, the interim secretary of the HHS, Dr. Dorothy Fink, and interim director of NIH, Dr. Matthew J. Mempoli,

The latest: Kelley Judge in The United States District Court in Massachusetts issued a court order on February 10 that blocks the rate reduction in the 22 states they demanded. Kelley is listening to the three challenges to the NiH plan during the same audience of February 21.

Universities also demand nih

Similar to the other two legal challenges aimed at tariff cutting, this demand for groups and universities of higher education aims to cancel the change of policy, which the plaintiffs call a “flagrantly illegal action”. They sued the Trump administration on February 10 at the Massachusetts district court of Massachusetts in the United States (read the complaint here.

• Lawsuit: Association of American Universities v. Department of Health and Human Services
• Plaintiffs: The American Association of Universities, the American Council of Education, the Association of Public and Land Universities, and a group of 13 universities. The universities are: Brandeis University, Brown University, University of California, California Institute of Technology, Carnegie Mellon University, University of Chicago, University of Cornell, University of George Washington, Johns Hopkins University, Massachusetts Technology Institute, University of The University of Pennsylvania, University of Rochester and University of Tufts.
• DEMANDED: The Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, the interim secretary of the HHS, Dr. Dorothy Fink, and interim director of NIH, Dr. Matthew J. Mempoli,

The latest: Judge Kelley said that the motion for a temporary restriction order was not necessary because he had already granted a national court order in the demand of medical universities. She celebrates a hearing on the three demands on February 21.

Challenging Dei’s orders

University professors and university diversity officers were associated with non -profit organizations and local governments to challenge Trump’s executive orders that point to diversity, equity and inclusion programs in the public and private sectors. The lawsuit was filed on February 3 at the Federal District Court in Maryland and requested that anti-dei orders were declared illegal and placed under court order. The plaintiffs argue the orders violate the first and fifth amendment and threaten academic freedom and access to higher education for all. (Read the complaint here.

• Lawsuit: National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump
• The plaintiffs: He National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Teachers, Restaurant Opportunity Centers United, and the Mayor and the City of Baltimore, Maryland
• DEMANDED: President Donald Trump and several other federal agencies and interim secretaries, including the Department of Education.

The latest: Judge Adam Abelson He scheduled a hearing in person at 2 PM of February 19 to address the demanding motion for a temporary restriction order and/or a preliminary court order.

Fight Trump’s transgender ban

Challenging a recent executive order that prohibits transgender girls and women from participating in women’s sports in schools and public schools, this demand argues that politics is discriminatory. The case originally challenged a law of New Hampshire that prohibits trans girls in grades 5-12 to join school sports teams that align with their gender.

But on February 12, the plaintiffs filed a complaint amended to include Trump and federal departments. The plaintiffs, two transgender adolescents, are represented by Glad Law and the ACLU of New Hampshire. The demand argues that Trump’s orders illegally submit to the respective schools of girls, as well as schools and universities to the threat of losing federal funds if they allow trans girls and women to participate. (Read the complaint here.

• Lawsuit: Tirrell v. Edelblut
• The plaintiffs: Parker Tirrell, represented by his parents, Sara and Zachary Tirrell, and Iris Turmelle, represented by Amy Manzelli and Chad Turmelle.
• DEMANDED: New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut, the New Hampshire State Education Board, the PEMI-Baker Regional School District, the Pembroke School District, President Donald Trump, the Department of Justice and the Department of Education .

The latest: The amended complaint, presented on February 12, is the last action.