US Federal Government Threatens to Further Cut Harvard Funding Over Defiance

Student protesters setting up tents in front of the John Harvard Statue in Harvard Yard during a rally in April 2024. Photo credit: Jesse Costa/WBUR

On May 5, the U.S. Department of Education notified Harvard University that it would further terminate billions of dollars in research grants and financial aid unless the university complies with a list of demands from the Trump administration—demands that would effectively cede significant control of university operations to the federal government. Similar to actions taken against Columbia University, both the targeting of Harvard and the nature of the demands represent a grave violation of academic freedom.

The crackdown stems from Harvard’s rejection of a lengthy set of conditions issued by the administration’s antisemitism task force, following pro- Palestinian student protests on campus. Education Secretary McMahon accused Harvard of a “systematic pattern of violating federal law” and claimed the university fosters anti-American sentiment while tolerating violent conduct among international students. On May 1, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller warned: “Universities are on notice… Harvard, in particular, has engaged in repeated, systemic, and sustained violations.”

In response, Harvard President Alan Garber announced last month that the university is suing the federal government for retaliatory actions, including a freeze on $2.2 billion in funding and threats to cut an additional $1 billion. In a letter to the Harvard community, Garber also cited ongoing federal investigations, threats to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, and efforts to limit the education of international students.

Harvard’s lawsuit argues that the administration’s actions violate the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from imposing ideological control on private institutions. The university also questioned how cutting research funding advances the administration's stated goal of combating antisemitism. The suit further contends that legal procedures established by Congress for withholding federal funds on grounds of discrimination were not followed. “These demands would give the government sweeping and improper control over the university,” Garber wrote. Harvard warned that the loss of federal funding would severely impact research, medical care, and academic programs across disciplines.

The administration’s pressure campaign has triggered widespread alarm in the academic community. On April 22, nearly 200 university leaders signed a joint statement condemning what they described as “unprecedented government overreach and political interference in American higher education.” The letter, coordinated by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, included signatories from both public and private institutions.

In response, universities are also forming alliances to push back against the administration’s escalating attacks on academic freedom. Faculties at 18 universities within the Big Ten Academic Alliance have passed resolutions warning that “politically motivated actions by governmental bodies [pose] a significant threat to the foundational principles of American higher education, including the autonomy of university governance, the integrity of scientific research, and the protection of free speech.” Meanwhile, ten leading universities—including Ivies and public universities—have formed an informal collective to coordinate resistance and discourage institutions from capitulating to federal demands, fearing it would set a dangerous precedent.

Despite its public resistance, Harvard has faced criticism for complying with at least one demand. On April 28, the university announced it had renamed its “Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging” to “Community and Campus Life.” While the office’s leadership claimed the move aimed to encourage dialogue across differences, critics noted that the change came after the Trump administration called for the elimination of DEI initiatives in an April 11 letter. A same-day executive order declared such programs “unlawfully discriminatory” and threatened to revoke accreditation from institutions that maintain them. The Harvard Gazette reported that President Garber directed the office’s renaming.

In a separate and controversial decision, Harvard disclosed on April 30 that it had shared unspecified student records with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including information about the activities and disciplinary histories of international students. DHS had demanded the data, warning that failure to comply could endanger the university’s ability to host international students. The disclosure came despite strong opposition from student leaders and campus organizations urging Harvard to resist the request.

Endangered Scholars Worldwide is gravely concerned by the escalating and targeted repression of universities in the United States. The Trump administration's deployment of legal and administrative powers to silence dissent—often in defiance of judicial rulings—represents a dangerous weaponization of the state against higher education. We urge U.S. universities to stand firm in defending the academic freedom of their students and faculty, and to reject political pressures that compromise their institutional autonomy. We call on scholars, institutions, and advocates worldwide to join us in upholding the core principles of academic freedom and the independence of higher education.