Trump's Harvard funding freeze struck down by federal judge
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
People move furniture into Harvard's Quincy House on Aug. 29. Photo: Ben Pennington/The Boston Globe via Getty Images
A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration illegally froze nearly $3 billion in federal grants to Harvard.
The big picture: The Trump administration's demands on Harvard were unconstitutional and violated the university's First Amendment rights, Judge Allison Burroughs said in the ruling.
- The order also bars the Trump administration from issuing new freeze orders in retaliation against Harvard.
- Burroughs agreed with Harvard's argument that the administration's funding freeze was in retaliation for the university's refusal to give in to demands for reform — such as the end of its diversity, equity and inclusion programs and doing more to address antisemitism on campus.
The latest: Harvard president Alan Garber said Wednesday evening the ruling "affirms Harvard's First Amendment and procedural rights, and validates our arguments in defense of the University's academic freedom, critical scientific research, and the core principles of American higher education."
- The college would "continue to assess the implications of the opinion, monitor further legal developments and be mindful of the changing landscape in which we seek to fulfill our mission," he added in the statement.
What they're saying: "We will immediately move to appeal this egregious decision, and we are confident we will ultimately prevail in our efforts to hold Harvard accountable," White House spokesperson Liz Huston told Axios in an emailed statement.
- "Harvard does not have a constitutional right to taxpayer dollars and remains ineligible for grants in the future."
- Madi Biedermann, an Education Department spokesperson, told Axios that Burroughs' ruling was "unsurprising."
- The Department of Justice and Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.
Zoom in: "Harvard is currently, even if belatedly, taking steps it needs to take to combat antisemitism and seems willing to do even more if need be," Burroughs wrote.
- "Now it is the job of the courts to similarly step up, to act to safeguard academic freedom and freedom of speech as required by the Constitution and to ensure that important research is not improperly subjected to arbitrary and procedurally infirm grant terminations, even if doing so risks the wrath of a government committed to its agenda no matter the cost."
Context: Burroughs cited a letter the Trump administration sent to Harvard in April that said the funds would be released only if the university implemented "ten terms, only one of which related to antisemitism."
- She noted that six of the terms were "related to ideological and pedagogical concerns, including who may lead and teach at Harvard, who may be admitted, and what may be taught."
Zoom out: Harvard has been at the center of the Trump administration's broader campaign to exercise control of curriculum at America's elite institutions.
- In a separate ruling issued by Burroughs in June, she determined that the administration could not bar the university from hosting international students as punishment for having differing viewpoints than the president.
- Trump said in July "when she rules against us, we will IMMEDIATELY appeal, and WIN."
Go deeper: Scoop: Dems threaten investigation if Harvard cuts deal with Trump
Editor's note: This article has been updated with new details throughout.
