What’s New
Harvard University sued the Trump administration on Monday, alleging that a decision to freeze billions of dollars in research grants over antisemitism concerns violated the First Amendment and a range of federal laws and regulations. It’s the first time a university has brought a legal challenge after being singled out by President Trump.
The Details
Harvard’s complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, argues that the First Amendment does not allow the federal government to force a private university to adopt a particular ideological agenda.
What’s more, the lawsuit states, the Trump administration has not identified “any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, and other research it has frozen.”
As tensions between federal officials and Harvard ratcheted up in recent weeks, the government announced a freeze of $2.2 billion in multiyear federal grants and another $60 million in multiyear contracts.
In a statement on Monday, Alan M. Garber, Harvard’s president, argued that Trump’s funding threats will throttle research and discovery. “The consequences of the government’s overreach will be severe and long-lasting,” Garber said.
“As opportunities to reduce the risk of multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’s disease are on the horizon, the government is slamming on the brakes,” he added.
The lawsuit targets a broad group of federal agencies: the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Energy, and Defense; the National Institutes of Health; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA; and the General Services Administration.
Garber acknowledged news reports that the Trump administration had sent a recent list of demands, calling for unprecedented federal oversight of admissions and hiring, in error. But he pointed out that federal officials had doubled down on the letter’s “sweeping and intrusive” stipulations since then — by considering freezing an additional $1 billion in grants, revoking Harvard’s tax-exempt status, and blocking the university from enrolling international students.
The Backdrop
Throughout March and April, the federal government has paused or canceled higher-education funding en masse to try to wield influence over a handful of major research universities.
Trump officials have said their drastic actions are necessary to tackle widespread discrimination on college campuses — particularly focusing on alleged antisemitism and on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The administration has argued that DEI efforts are illegal because they treat people differently based on race.
Scholars across the country and globe have cheered Harvard’s defiance, contrasting its response with that of Columbia University, which made concessions to Trump to try to restore millions in canceled grant funding.
In his Monday statement, Garber seemingly acknowledged that the academic community was viewing Harvard as a standard-bearer in a fraught moment for the sector. “We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion,” he said.
The president of the American Council on Education praised Harvard’s decision to sue. “It has been clear for weeks that the administration’s actions violated due process and the rule of law,” ACE President Ted Mitchell said in a statement provided by a spokesperson.
What to Watch For
Legal experts have said for months that colleges have compelling arguments to make against Trump’s targeting of research funding. Harvard’s lawsuit will be the first major test case.
Harvard’s complaint asserts that the Trump administration has failed to follow established processes for revoking an institution’s government funding.
According to the lawsuit, federal officials have explicitly invoked the protections of Title VI — the civil-rights law barring discrimination based on race, color, and national origin, including Jewish ancestry — as a justification for cracking down on colleges over alleged antisemitism. But there are specific requirements for pulling funding over alleged Title VI discrimination, the lawsuit states.
“Before taking punitive action, the law requires that the federal government engage with us about the ways we are fighting and will continue to fight antisemitism,” Garber said Monday. But the prescriptive demands that Harvard rejected, he said, “seek to control whom we hire and what we teach.”
Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said he sees the Trump administration’s recent actions against Harvard as yet another example of the government’s “abuses” of antidiscrimination efforts.
“Colleges must comply with civil rights laws to receive federal funding,” Coward said in a statement. “Enforcement of those laws must be lawful, transparent, and respect constitutional rights.”
