Lawsuit Challenges Columbia University’s Compliance with Congressional Inquiry into Student Records

Courtesy Photo

Students and Civil Rights Groups Sue Columbia over Alleged Violations of Privacy and Free Speech

NEW YORK, NY — A coalition of Columbia University students and civil rights organizations has filed a lawsuit against Columbia University, Barnard College, and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, alleging violations of student privacy rights and First Amendment protections.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that the university’s cooperation with a Congressional request for student disciplinary records constitutes an unconstitutional suppression of student activism, particularly advocacy for Palestinian human rights.

The plaintiffs, who include eight students at Columbia and Barnard, claim that the university’s willingness to disclose private student records to a federal committee investigating alleged antisemitism on campus sets a dangerous precedent. The lawsuit also contends that Columbia’s compliance with the Congressional demand exposes students to harassment, doxxing, and retaliation for their political views.

On February 13, 2025, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce sent a letter to Columbia University demanding all student or student-worker disciplinary records related to eleven specific campus protests and incidents. The committee suggested that Columbia’s compliance could impact its access to billions in federal funding.

The students and advocacy groups argue that this request is an attempt to intimidate and silence pro-Palestinian activists, particularly in light of previous Congressional hearings that aggressively scrutinized university leaders over their handling of campus protests.

Amy Greer, Esq., an associate at Dratel & Lewis, one of the law firms representing the plaintiffs, warned that Columbia’s cooperation with the Congressional request threatens student rights: “Columbia University’s apparent willingness to comply with the Congressional request to disclose private student records sets a dangerous precedent that undermines academic freedom and student privacy. Our lawsuit seeks to protect the constitutional rights of students who should not be subjected to political intimidation or invasive government overreach. We will continue to fight for the privacy and dignity of all students.”

The lawsuit contends that the House Committee’s actions mirror McCarthy-era tactics, using government pressure to suppress political speech under the pretense of investigating campus antisemitism.

Lamya Agarwala, Esq., Supervising Attorney for CAIR-NY, described the case as part of a broader trend of targeting advocacy for Palestinian rights: “We’re witnessing an escalation of longstanding tactics to suppress speech in support of Palestinian human rights. This case aims to prevent Columbia from turning into an arm of the federal government and do its bidding of suppressing speech it doesn’t like.”

Plaintiffs argue that turning over student records to Congress violates federal privacy laws, particularly the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which prohibits the release of student records without consent. The lawsuit further claims that Columbia’s decision to comply with these demands demonstrates a failure to protect students from retaliation and harassment.

The lawsuit highlights the real-world consequences of disclosing student records, noting that previous Congressional hearings led to doxxing, harassment, and professional repercussions for students and faculty.

Several students claim that their identities were exposed through leaked documents, leading to threats, job losses, and social media harassment. They argue that if Columbia complies with the latest Congressional request, students will be placed in even greater danger.

Gadeir Abbas, Esq., Senior Litigation Attorney at CAIR, underscored the broader implications of the case: “No student should fear that their private information will be handed over to politicians who seek to punish advocacy for Palestinian human rights. This legal action is a necessary step to push back against efforts to silence and surveil students exercising their First Amendment rights.”

The complaint details how students have been targeted online, with conservative media outlets amplifying their names and images, often framing them as supporters of terrorism. One student activist, Mahmoud Khalil, a Syrian-born Palestinian refugee, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) following his participation in campus protests, prompting allegations that federal authorities are criminalizing political speech.

While Columbia has not publicly stated whether it intends to comply with the Congressional request, the lawsuit alleges that university administrators are preparing to hand over the records. An internal February 27, 2025, email from Columbia’s private counsel at Hecker & Fink, referenced in the complaint, suggests the university is considering compliance despite concerns over student privacy protections.

Columbia and Barnard’s leadership has faced increasing political pressure from the federal government, with President Trump’s administration threatening to withhold federal funding from universities that fail to take strong action against antisemitism. The Department of Education announced in March 2025 that it was reviewing Columbia’s federal contracts and grants, intensifying concerns that the university may comply with the records request to avoid financial repercussions.

The lawsuit warns that by turning over student records, Columbia would effectively be acting as an agent of the federal government, engaging in politically motivated surveillance of its own students.

The legal battle is part of a larger national debate over free speech, student activism, and the role of universities in protecting dissent. The plaintiffs argue that Columbia has a contractual obligation—outlined in its policies on free expression—to uphold academic freedom and protect students from retaliation.

Hamid Bendaas, Communications Director at the IMEU Policy Project, warned that allowing political pressure to dictate university discipline threatens the integrity of higher education: “Targeting student activists under the guise of federal investigations is a blatant attempt to suppress voices advocating for Palestinian rights. It is essential that institutions of higher learning resist external pressures that threaten free expression and academic inquiry.”

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction to prevent Columbia from disclosing student records.  They are also seeking a declaration that the Congressional request violates the First Amendment and a ruling that Columbia’s compliance would violate FERPA and breach student contracts.

Categories:

Tags: