The administration of former US President Donald Trump has revoked an additional $450 million in federal grants from Harvard University, deepening an ongoing dispute that has drawn sharp criticism from academic and political circles.
The latest move comes on the heels of an earlier decision to suspend over $2.2 billion in research contracts and federal funding, part of a broader campaign by the Trump administration to exert greater control over elite academic institutions in the wake of nationwide pro-Palestinian campus protests.
A task force formed under Trump accused Harvard of “long-standing racial discrimination” and fostering an environment hostile to certain viewpoints, including what it described as the “institutionalisation of anti-Semitism.”
“Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signalling and discrimination,” the task force said in a statement released on Tuesday. “This is not academic freedom; it is institutional disenfranchisement.”
The standoff between Trump and Harvard began in March when the administration demanded reforms at several top universities that hosted pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Harvard, the nation’s oldest university, and Columbia University were singled out for scrutiny.
Columbia had earlier faced similar pressure from the Trump administration. Following a wave of protests at its New York City campus and the subsequent arrest and deportation of a foreign student activist, the university agreed to a set of federal demands, including the formal adoption of an anti-Semitism definition, increased security measures, and the oversight of certain academic departments.
The precedent set at Columbia was later used to frame a set of broader, more intrusive requirements aimed at Harvard. These included overhauling its disciplinary system, eliminating diversity initiatives, and permitting external audits of programmes accused of fostering anti-Semitism.
Crucially, the administration also called for “structural and personnel changes” to promote “viewpoint diversity”, a term that critics say remains ambiguous and may be used to push ideological appointments.
In response, Harvard President Alan Garber rejected the administration’s demands on April 14, calling them a violation of academic autonomy.
“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,” Garber said in a strongly worded letter.
The Trump administration has not only threatened further funding cuts but has also raised the possibility of revoking Harvard’s tax-exempt status, prompting legal and ethical concerns from watchdog groups and members of Congress.
Democrats have accused the former president of weaponising federal agencies against institutions that do not align with his views. Any interference with the Internal Revenue Service’s independence in targeting specific entities is likely to face legal challenges.
The Department of Homeland Security has reportedly also issued warnings to Harvard, demanding records linked to foreign students involved in campus protests. Officials have threatened to block enrolment of international students if compliance is not ensured.
Despite mounting pressure, Garber reiterated Harvard’s stance in a letter to Trump’s Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, on Monday. He defended the university’s commitment to free speech while acknowledging concerns over anti-Semitism.
“We share common ground on a number of critical issues, including the importance of ending antisemitism and other bigotry on campus,” he wrote. “Like you, I believe that Harvard must foster an academic environment that encourages freedom of thought and expression, and that we should embrace a multiplicity of viewpoints.”
However, Garber cautioned that the administration’s heavy-handed approach threatened the independence and integrity of the academic institution.
“Harvard will not surrender its core, legally-protected principles out of fear of unfounded retaliation by the federal government,” he stated.
He also pushed back against accusations of political bias: “Harvard is neither Republican nor Democratic. It is not an arm of any political party or movement. Nor will it ever be.”
