Harvard’s Battle With Trump Update: Judge Rules President’s Admin Illegally Froze $2.2B In Research Funding

A federal judge ruled on Wednesday that the Trump administration illegally froze $2.2 billion in federal research grants from Harvard University. U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs said that the attempt to freeze research grants has no connection to claims of antisemitism on campus and that withholding grants was ideologically motivated.

“A review of the administrative record makes it difficult to conclude anything other than that Defendants used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities,” she wrote in an 84-page opinion, according to Politico.

Burroughs added that Harvard “could (and should) have done a better job of dealing with” antisemitism on campus.

The Trump administration’s attempt to freeze research grants violated the First Amendment

In April, the Trump administration demanded Harvard comply with a list of demands regarding its admissions and disciplinary policies, citing an infringement of free speech. The university refused, which led to the White House freezing $2.2 billion in federal research grants. The administration also launched a review of $9 billion in grants and contracts over the treatment of Jewish students during campus protests in support of Palestine last year.

Harvard President Alan Garber stated that the Trump administration’s demands to reinstate the grants were an attempt “to control whom we hire and what we teach.”

Burroughs ruled that attempting to freeze grants violated the First Amendment, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

“The idea that fighting antisemitism is Defendants’ true aim is belied by the fact that the majority of the demands they are making of Harvard to restore its research funding are directed, on their face, at Harvard’s governance, staffing and hiring practices, and admissions policies—all of which have little to do with antisemitism and everything to do with Defendants’ power and political views,” Burroughs wrote.

A victory for Harvard amid its ongoing legal battle with the Trump administration

Garber noted that Harvard still remains in a legal battle with the Trump administration: “Even as we acknowledge the important principles affirmed in today’s ruling, we will 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 said in a letter to the campus community published on Wednesday.

In May, Trump said he planned on canceling the university’s tax-exempt status. The following month, he took legal action against Harvard by restricting the university’s ability to enroll international students. The Trump administration said it plans to appeal Wednesday’s decision. 

“Just as President Trump correctly predicted on the day of the hearing, this activist Obama-appointed judge was always going to rule in Harvard’s favor, regardless of the facts,” White House spokesperson Liz Huston said. “To any fair-minded observer, it is clear that Harvard University failed to protect their students from harassment and allowed discrimination to plague their campus for years. Harvard does not have a constitutional right to taxpayer dollars and remains ineligible for grants in the future.”