Now that Harvard University has rejected a list of conditions from the Trump administration implicating billions in future federal funding, the lines between campus free speech, racial policies, and federal oversight of higher education activities could ultimately be drawn in federal courts.
The federal Joint Task Force on Anti-Semitism announced on April 14 that it is freezing $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts in response to the university’s alleged refusal to take steps to combat campus anti-Semitism and end DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives.
That prompted responses from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Department of Education, on behalf of that task force, accusing the Ivy League school of violating civil rights laws by not taking anti-Semitism and discrimination on campus seriously.
“Harvard’s statement 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,” HHS said in an April 15 statement, which was emailed to The Epoch Times.
At this point, say policy experts, court battles are inevitable.
President Donald Trump, who initially warned that Harvard stands to lose about $9 billion due to noncompliance with his executive orders regarding campus anti-Semitism and DEI, has already compelled Columbia University to comply with similar conditions.
Andrew Gillen, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, told The Epoch Times that “serious litigation” from Harvard is expected within days. The decisions will ultimately be based on legal merits, not on one side having more money for lawyers, he said.
“Maybe not everything [the Trump administration is] asking schools to do in a case like this are related to Civil Rights. This is something courts should clarify, so it’s fundamentally a good thing,” he said.
Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, said “the fight of the century” is looming, especially considering that at least 111 U.S. federal judges and four Supreme Court justices are Harvard Law School graduates.
“I think Harvard is looking at its chances in [the] Supreme Court,” he told The Epoch Times. “But I think the Trump administration will prevail.”
Still, he wrote, the school lost the 2023 Supreme Court case that prohibits racial preferences in student admissions, and last year it was unable to defend former university president Claudine Gay against allegations of plagiarism and accusations that she didn’t do enough to stop the harassment of Jewish students following the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by terrorist group Hamas.
“Harvard is not going to admit defeat,” Wood said.
Harvard’s loss of research funds was already exacerbated by the National Institute of Health’s recent decision to cap research grant overhead costs at 15 percent.
Wood said those administrative costs, which don’t cover the actual research labor and materials, were inflated by more than $28 billion on a national scale in 2023. The most elite schools, he added, use much of that extra money on administrative functions that promote progressive initiatives and are unrelated to scientific discovery.
Federal research money is awarded through a very competitive process, he said, so if Harvard is disqualified from future funding, more than 180 other research universities are still eligible to work on medical breakthroughs and scientific innovation.
This fight has generated plenty of noise in Boston and the Beltway.
Former President Barack Obama was quick to applaud leaders of his alma mater.
“It is not the constitutional right of any private university to receive federal funding in perpetuity,“ the club’s statement said. ”While some of the funding has been allocated to reasonable programs, Harvard has shown itself to be a partisan consumer of the American taxpayer dollar.”
“Universities need to address legitimate criticisms with humility and openness. But the way to bring about constructive change is not by destroying the nation’s capacity for scientific research or through the government taking command of a private institution,” said the April 15 statement from President Jonathan Levin and Provost Jenny Martinez.
“Harvard’s objections to the letter it received are rooted in the American tradition of liberty, a tradition essential to our country’s universities, and worth defending.”
Trump, in a Truth Social post, threatened to revoke Harvard’s status as a non-profit institution.
“Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness?’” Trump posted.
“Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Harvard University for additional comment.
