Harvard University faces a $2.3 billion federal funding freeze by the Trump Administration.

This reactionary funding freeze comes a day after the Ivy League University publicly rejected the federal government’s demands.

Alan M. Garber, Harvard President’s responded to government demands that triggered the funding freeze. He adamantly stated that “The University will not surrender its independence or its constitutional rights.”

Federal Government Demands

The federal government addressed a letter to Harvard with criticism, stating that “an investment [in the institution] is not an entitlement” and that they have “in recent years failed to live up to both intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment.”

These demands follow the widespread pro-Palestinian protests that happened across university campuses in the US.

In the document, the federal government details ten points that the university must agree to and adhere to in order to receive government funding.

The demands include monitoring foreign investments and compliance with the proposed government reforms. Further demands include ceasing positive discrimination in place of merit hiring and merit-based admissions in a similar vein.

The government also demanded a reform of the admissions process for international students, “to prevent admitting students hostile to American values and institutions.” Other demands seek to either restrict or remove the universities’ programs, such as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs, and student disciplinary programs.

Harvard’s Response

In response, Harvard’s President rejected the demands made by the government whilst expressing its commitment to fight antisemitic and discriminatory behaviour.

The institution made clear that the demands made traverse the boundaries of ‘the lawful authority of this or any administration.’ Harvard expressed their rejection in a letter addressed directly to the federal government, as well as publicising their comments across social media.

The institution adamantly stated:

“Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government”

They further explained that: “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.”

 

The Reaction

This rejection subsequently led to President Donald Trump’s administration freezing $2.3 billion in Harvard funding. A clear indication of the administration’s dissatisfaction with the noncompliance of their demands.

The day after the rejection, the President threatened in a social media post that Harvard might lose its tax exemption, which he states “is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!”

It has been reported that the IRS are currently planning to remove the tax exemption that Harvard has.

In condemnation, Barack Obama, former President of the United States described the funding freeze as “unlawful and ham-handed” and expressed admiration at the institution’s defiance against the government’s demands. He further stated that “Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions” through their rejection.

Harvard has also received support from other institutions, such as Columbia University, Stanford University and Princeton University.

Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary, told the press that Trump “wants to see Harvard apologise, and Harvard should apologise” for the events that took place on their campus.

As of recently, Harvard have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration.  The institution argues that the funding freeze is “unlawful” due to the government failing to comply with “the statutorily mandated process Congress required under Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act] before funds are cut off.”