Harvard University on Monday rejected a series of demands from the Trump administration, asserting that complying would effectively hand over control of the institution to a conservative government that frequently accuses universities of fostering left-leaning ideologies.
Shortly after Harvard’s public response, the administration announced it was freezing $2.3 billion in federal funding to the university.
The move follows a previous declaration by the Trump administration that it would review nearly $9 billion in federal contracts and grants awarded to Harvard. The review is part of a broader campaign the administration says targets antisemitism on college campuses—particularly in light of pro-Palestinian protests over the past 18 months.
On Monday, a Department of Education task force on combating antisemitism accused Harvard of embodying a “troubling entitlement mindset” seen across elite academic institutions—claiming the university fails to meet its civil rights obligations despite significant federal investment.
This development intensifies the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and some of the nation’s most prestigious and wealthiest universities. Critics warn the standoff could have lasting consequences for free speech and academic independence.
Federal funding has already been frozen at several universities. The administration is pressing for institutional policy changes and alleging that campuses have failed to adequately address antisemitism. Additionally, some foreign students involved in pro-Palestinian demonstrations are facing deportation proceedings, and hundreds of student visas have reportedly been revoked.
In a public letter on Monday, Harvard President Alan Garber said the Department of Education’s demands would give the federal government undue influence over the university’s internal affairs, compromising its status as a private institution committed to the pursuit of knowledge.
“No government—regardless of political party—should dictate what private universities teach, who they admit or hire, or which fields of study they pursue,” Garber wrote.
Garber acknowledged the importance of addressing antisemitism, stating, “As we defend Harvard, we remain committed to fostering a campus culture of open inquiry, building the tools to engage across differences, and expanding intellectual and viewpoint diversity.”
Tensions around campus antisemitism began before Trump’s return to office, following waves of student-led pro-Palestinian protests across multiple universities in 2023 and 2024.
In a statement Monday, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said President Trump is “working to Make Higher Education Great Again” by halting what he described as “unchecked anti-Semitism” and ending the use of federal funds to support “racial discrimination and racially motivated violence” at institutions like Harvard.
A letter from the Department of Education last Friday accused Harvard of failing to meet both the academic and civil rights standards required to justify its federal funding. The letter demanded that the university reduce the influence of students, faculty, and staff “more focused on activism than scholarship,” and called for external audits of every department to ensure ideological diversity.
It further required that by August, Harvard must admit and hire exclusively on merit—eliminating preferences based on race, ethnicity, or national origin—and begin screening international applicants to prevent the admission of those deemed “hostile to American values.” Additionally, the university would be expected to report foreign students who violate conduct policies to immigration authorities.
Last week, a group of Harvard professors filed a lawsuit challenging the administration’s review of the university’s federal grants and contracts, arguing that it threatens academic freedom.
The Trump administration is also reportedly considering similar action against Columbia University, potentially binding it under a consent decree requiring strict federal oversight of its antisemitism response efforts. Like their Harvard counterparts, some Columbia faculty members have also taken legal action against the government. Federal funding worth $400 million has already been suspended for Columbia.
Garber strongly condemned what he described as unconstitutional federal overreach, stating that demands for the university to audit the political beliefs of faculty and students were a clear violation of First Amendment protections.
“Harvard will not surrender its independence or its constitutional rights,” he wrote.
While reaffirming the university’s commitment to combating antisemitism, Garber added, “These efforts must not be dictated by assertions of unchecked power that are unmoored from the law and threaten academic freedom.”
He emphasized that freedom of thought and inquiry—long safeguarded by government respect for university autonomy—has been essential to fostering a free society and improving lives around the world.
In January, Harvard agreed to enhanced protections for Jewish students as part of a legal settlement resolving two lawsuits alleging the university had failed to address campus antisemitism.
To manage potential financial strain from the federal funding freeze, Harvard is reportedly seeking to borrow $750 million from private lenders.