Trump
Administration Will Freeze $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses Demands
Federal
officials said they would freeze the money after Harvard said it would not
submit to requests to overhaul hiring and report international students who
break rules.
By Vimal
Patel
April 14,
2025
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/us/harvard-trump-reject-demands.html
The Trump
administration acted quickly on Monday to punish Harvard University after it
refused to comply with a list of demands from the federal government that the
school said were unlawful.
On Monday
afternoon, Harvard became the first university to refuse to comply with the
administration’s requirements, setting up a showdown between the federal
government and the nation’s wealthiest university. By the evening, federal
officials said they would freeze $2.2 billion in multiyear grants to Harvard,
along with a $60 million contract.
Other
universities have pushed back against the administration’s interference in
higher education. But Harvard’s response, which called the Trump
administration’s demands illegal, marked a major shift in tone for the nation’s
most influential school, which has been criticized in recent weeks for
capitulating to Trump administration pressure.
A letter the
Trump administration sent to Harvard on Friday demanded that the university
reduce the power of students and faculty members over the university’s affairs;
report foreign students who commit conduct violations immediately to federal
authorities; and bring in an outside party to ensure that each academic
department is “viewpoint diverse,” among other steps. The administration did
not define what it meant by viewpoint diversity, but it has generally referred
to seeking a range of political views, including conservative perspectives.
“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,” said Alan Garber, Harvard’s president,
in a statement to the university on Monday.
Since taking
office in January, the Trump administration has aggressively targeted
universities, saying it is investigating dozens of schools as it moves to
eradicate diversity efforts and what it says is rampant antisemitism on campus.
Officials have suspended hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds for
research at universities across the country.
The
administration has taken a particular interest in a short list of the nation’s
most prominent schools. Officials have discussed toppling a high-profile
university as part of their campaign to remake higher education. They took aim
first at Columbia University, then at other members of the Ivy League,
including Harvard. The announcement of the funding freeze was issued by members
of a federal antisemitism task force that has been behind much of the effort to
target schools.
“Harvard’s
statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in
our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges,” said a statement from
the task force, posted by the General Services Administration.
Harvard, for
its part, has been under intense pressure from its own students and faculty to
be more forceful in resisting the Trump administration’s encroachment on the
university and on higher education more broadly.
The Trump
administration said in March that it was examining about $256 million in
federal contracts for Harvard, and an additional $8.7 billion in what it
described as “multiyear grant commitments.” The announcement went on to suggest
that Harvard had not done enough to curb antisemitism on campus. At the time,
it was vague about what the university could do to satisfy Trump administration
concerns.
Last month,
more than 800 faculty members at Harvard signed a letter urging the university
to “mount a coordinated opposition to these anti-democratic attacks.”
The
university appeared to take a step in that direction on Monday. In his letter
rejecting the administration’s demands, Dr. Garber suggested that Harvard had
little alternative.
“The
university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional
rights,” he wrote. “Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow
itself to be taken over by the federal government.”
The
government’s letter to Harvard on Friday demanded an extraordinary set of
changes that would have reshaped the university and ceded an unprecedented
degree of control over Harvard’s operations to the federal government. The
changes would have violated principles that are held dear on colleges campuses,
including academic freedom.
Some of the
actions that the Trump administration demanded of Harvard were:
- Conducting plagiarism checks on all current and prospective faculty members.
- Sharing all its hiring data with the Trump administration, and subjecting itself to audits of its hiring while “reforms are being implemented,” at least through 2028.
- Providing all admissions data to the federal government, including information on both rejected and admitted applicants, sorted by race, national origin, grade-point average and performance on standardized tests.
- Immediately shutting down any programming related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
Overhauling
academic programs that the Trump administration says have “egregious records on
antisemitism,” including placing certain departments and programs under an
external audit. The list includes the Divinity School, the Graduate School of
Education, the School of Public Health and the Medical School, among many
others.
The demands
suggested that the federal government wanted to intrude on processes that
universities prefer to have control over, like how they admit their incoming
classes. It also touched on issues that conservative activists have used as
cudgels against academics. Plagiarism accusations, for example, are part of the
reasons that Harvard’s former president, Claudine Gay, was forced to resign.
“Harvard has
in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights
conditions that justify federal investment,” the Trump administration letter
said.
Last month,
after the Trump administration stripped $400 million in federal funds from
Columbia University, Columbia agreed to major concessions demanded by the
federal government. It agreed to place its Middle Eastern studies department
under different oversight and to create a new security force of 36 “special
officers” empowered to arrest and remove people from campus.
The demands
on Harvard were different, and much more expansive, touching on many aspects of
the university’s basic operations.
Representative
Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York who had questioned university
leaders, including Dr. Gay, over allegations that they had tolerated
antisemitism on campus, said that the Trump administration should “defund
Harvard” for defying the federal government.
“It is time
to totally cut off U.S. taxpayer funding to this institution,” she wrote in a
social media post on Monday.
In Harvard’s
response on Monday, it said it had already made major changes over the last 15
months to improve its campus climate and counter antisemitism, including
disciplining students who violate university policies, devoting resources to
programs that promote ideological diversity, and improving security.
Harvard said
it was unfortunate that the administration had ignored the university’s efforts
and moved instead to infringe on the school’s freedom in unlawful ways.
The forceful
posture taken by Harvard on Monday was applauded across higher education, after
universities had drawn widespread criticism for failing to resist Mr. Trump’s
attacks more aggressively.
Harvard
itself had been under fire for a series of moves in recent months that faculty
members said were taken to placate Mr. Trump, including hiring a lobbying firm
with close ties to the president and pushing out the faculty leaders of the
Center for Middle Eastern Studies.
A Harvard
faculty group filed a lawsuit last week, seeking to block the administration
from carrying out its threat to withdraw federal funding from the university.
Nikolas Bowie, a law professor and secretary-treasurer of Harvard’s chapter of
the American Association of University Professors, the group that filed the
suit, applauded Harvard’s rejection of the Trump administration’s demands.
“I’m
grateful for President Garber’s courage and leadership,” said Dr. Bowie. “His
response recognizes that there’s no negotiating with extortion.”
Ted
Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, which represents many
colleges and universities in Washington, said Harvard’s approach could embolden
other campus leaders, whom he said were “breathing a sigh of relief.”
“This gives
more room for others to stand up, in part because if Harvard hadn’t, it would
have said to everyone else, ‘You don’t stand a chance,’” said Dr. Mitchell, a
former president of Occidental College. “This gives people a sense of the
possible.”
He described
Harvard’s response as “a road map for how institutions could oppose the
administration on this incursion into institutional decision-making.” He added,
“Whether it’s antisemitism or doing merit-based hiring or merit-based
admissions, the basic texture of the academic enterprise needs to be decided by
the university, not by the government.”
Ethan Kelly,
22, a senior at Harvard from Maryland, said that Monday’s message from Dr.
Garber was a relief. He said that he and many of his classmates have been
concerned that their school would cave to the Trump administration’s demands.
“There’s
been so much concern that Harvard would fold under political pressure,
especially with how aggressive the Trump administration has been in trying to
control higher education,” Mr. Kelly said. Seeing Dr. Garber draw a clear line,
he added, was something “that matters.”
In a related
development, nine major research universities and three university associations
sued the Trump administration on Monday to restore $400 million in funding that
the Energy Department said it was slashing last week.
In a
statement, Michael I. Kotlikoff, the president of Cornell University, one of
the schools that joined the lawsuit, said the research at stake was “vital to
national security, American manufacturing, economic competitiveness and
progress toward energy independence.”
Other
schools listed as plaintiffs were Brown University, Caltech, the University of
Illinois, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of
Michigan, Michigan State, Princeton and the University of Rochester. The Energy
Department said it would dramatically reduce overhead or “indirect” costs
associated with the grants.
Reporting
was contributed by Stephanie Saul, Alan Blinder and Miles Herszenhorn.
Vimal Patel writes about higher education with a focus on speech and campus c
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário