The Trump administration announced Monday it will freeze $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts for Harvard after the university refused to comply with its policy demands concerning changes in its policies.
The mandates, issued in an April 3 directive, required changes to university governance, hiring and admissions processes, the closure of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices, and cooperation with federal immigration screenings for international students.
The Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism that suspended the fundings and grants cited concerns about elite universities’ commitment to civil rights and responsible use of taxpayer funds. "Harvard's statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges - that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws," it said.
"The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable. It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support," it added to it statement.
What the Trump administration wanted from Harvard?
In a letter dated April 11 to Harvard President Alan Garber, US officials accused Harvard of failing to uphold federal civil rights laws and academic standards that justify continued federal investment. The letter outlined a set of strict reforms the university must implement by August 2025. "The United States has invested in Harvard University’s operations because of the value to the country of scholarly discovery and academic excellence. But an investment is not an entitlement. It depends on Harvard upholding federal civil rights laws, and it only makes sense if Harvard fosters the kind of environment that produces intellectual creativity and scholarly rigor, both of which are antithetical to ideological capture." it said.
"Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment. But we appreciate your expression of commitment to repairing those failures and welcome your collaboration in restoring the University to its promise. We therefore present the below provisions as the basis for an agreement in principle that will maintain Harvard’s financial relationship with the federal government," it added while listing out the demands for the ivy league university which included governance and leadership demands, merit-based hiring reforms, international admissions reforms, discontinuation of DEI, whistleblower reporting and ensuring transparency.
Harvard's response the demands
In its response, Harvard President Alan Garber declared the university would not “negotiate over its independence or its constitutional rights.” Garber claimed that while the university is committed to addressing discrimination, it rejects federal overreach into academic autonomy. “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber wrote in a message to the community, as per the Harvard Gazette. “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue," he added.
Garber's response came after the government issued a list of requirements prior to announcing the funding freeze. These included detailed assessments of academic divisions and departments, evaluations of perspectives from students, faculty, and staff, as well as proposed changes to Harvard's administrative structure and recruitment procedures.
Following the order, Harvard Law School professor Nikolas Bowie gave a statement to CNN’s News Central saying, “What the President of the United States is demanding of universities is nothing short of authoritarian." “He is violating the First Amendment rights of universities and faculty by demanding that if universities want to keep this money, they have to suppress our speech and change what we teach and how we study,” he added.
This action follows heightened tensions on campuses nationwide, particularly after pro-Palestinian protests erupted in response to Israel’s military operations in Gaza. Some demonstrations led to confrontations with law enforcement and pro-Israel counter-protesters.
Republican leaders, including President Donald Trump, have equated certain activist groups with Hamas—the US-designated terrorist organization whose October 7, 2023 attack on Israel sparked the current conflict.
In March, the US Department of Education launched investigations into 60 academic institutions over reports of anti-Semitic incidents.
Despite revealing a £45 million operating surplus from £6.5 billion in revenue last fiscal year, Harvard firmly rejected demands it deemed excessive and outside federal authority. Garber reiterated that political interference in academic decisions is unacceptable, regardless of party affiliation.
Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican known for her staunch support of Jewish and Israeli causes, has been a vocal critic of Harvard’s leadership. She praised the funding freeze, calling Harvard emblematic of higher education’s decline.
Unlike Harvard, Columbia University chose to comply with similar White House mandates, forfeiting $400 million in federal grants after failing to adequately protect Jewish students during protests. Columbia has since implemented new disciplinary policies and increased security measures.
Meanwhile, immigration authorities have pursued action against Columbia-based pro-Palestinian organizers. Mahmoud Khalil is undergoing deportation proceedings, and Mohsen Mahdawi was detained during his US citizenship interview.
The mandates, issued in an April 3 directive, required changes to university governance, hiring and admissions processes, the closure of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices, and cooperation with federal immigration screenings for international students.
The Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism that suspended the fundings and grants cited concerns about elite universities’ commitment to civil rights and responsible use of taxpayer funds. "Harvard's statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges - that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws," it said.
"The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable. It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support," it added to it statement.
What the Trump administration wanted from Harvard?
In a letter dated April 11 to Harvard President Alan Garber, US officials accused Harvard of failing to uphold federal civil rights laws and academic standards that justify continued federal investment. The letter outlined a set of strict reforms the university must implement by August 2025. "The United States has invested in Harvard University’s operations because of the value to the country of scholarly discovery and academic excellence. But an investment is not an entitlement. It depends on Harvard upholding federal civil rights laws, and it only makes sense if Harvard fosters the kind of environment that produces intellectual creativity and scholarly rigor, both of which are antithetical to ideological capture." it said.
"Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment. But we appreciate your expression of commitment to repairing those failures and welcome your collaboration in restoring the University to its promise. We therefore present the below provisions as the basis for an agreement in principle that will maintain Harvard’s financial relationship with the federal government," it added while listing out the demands for the ivy league university which included governance and leadership demands, merit-based hiring reforms, international admissions reforms, discontinuation of DEI, whistleblower reporting and ensuring transparency.
Harvard's response the demands
In its response, Harvard President Alan Garber declared the university would not “negotiate over its independence or its constitutional rights.” Garber claimed that while the university is committed to addressing discrimination, it rejects federal overreach into academic autonomy. “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber wrote in a message to the community, as per the Harvard Gazette. “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue," he added.
Garber's response came after the government issued a list of requirements prior to announcing the funding freeze. These included detailed assessments of academic divisions and departments, evaluations of perspectives from students, faculty, and staff, as well as proposed changes to Harvard's administrative structure and recruitment procedures.
Following the order, Harvard Law School professor Nikolas Bowie gave a statement to CNN’s News Central saying, “What the President of the United States is demanding of universities is nothing short of authoritarian." “He is violating the First Amendment rights of universities and faculty by demanding that if universities want to keep this money, they have to suppress our speech and change what we teach and how we study,” he added.
This action follows heightened tensions on campuses nationwide, particularly after pro-Palestinian protests erupted in response to Israel’s military operations in Gaza. Some demonstrations led to confrontations with law enforcement and pro-Israel counter-protesters.
Republican leaders, including President Donald Trump, have equated certain activist groups with Hamas—the US-designated terrorist organization whose October 7, 2023 attack on Israel sparked the current conflict.
In March, the US Department of Education launched investigations into 60 academic institutions over reports of anti-Semitic incidents.
Despite revealing a £45 million operating surplus from £6.5 billion in revenue last fiscal year, Harvard firmly rejected demands it deemed excessive and outside federal authority. Garber reiterated that political interference in academic decisions is unacceptable, regardless of party affiliation.
Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican known for her staunch support of Jewish and Israeli causes, has been a vocal critic of Harvard’s leadership. She praised the funding freeze, calling Harvard emblematic of higher education’s decline.
Unlike Harvard, Columbia University chose to comply with similar White House mandates, forfeiting $400 million in federal grants after failing to adequately protect Jewish students during protests. Columbia has since implemented new disciplinary policies and increased security measures.
Meanwhile, immigration authorities have pursued action against Columbia-based pro-Palestinian organizers. Mahmoud Khalil is undergoing deportation proceedings, and Mohsen Mahdawi was detained during his US citizenship interview.
You may also like
Man Utd star could miss rest of the season as Ruben Amorim dealt fresh injury blow
"No basis for Congress party to do politics...": Sudhanshu Trivedi after ED chargesheet against Sonia, Rahul Gandhi
Gandhinagar: CM Bhupendra Patel chairs high-level meeting on summer drinking water planning in State
Team India will go to Bangladesh for 3 ODIs and 3 T20 Internationals, BCCI announced the schedule
Was Columbia student Mohsen Mahdawi tricked to attend his citizenship interview so that he could be arrested?
