Political Blackmail: How the Trump Administration Besieged Harvard University

Since returning to office, US President Donald Trump has made no secret of his renewed hostility toward elite academic institutions, especially Harvard University.

However, what initially appeared to be a reticence toward certain ideological trends has recently escalated into overt political blackmail, after his administration issued an ultimatum to the prestigious university, including a list of demands in exchange for continued federal funding. This was seen as an unprecedented threat to the independence of higher education in the United States.

It is not yet clear what further action the Trump administration may take against Harvard, although potential measures could include investigating its non-profit status and revoking more international student visas.

This move is part of a broader campaign by President Trump and Stephen Miller, one of his influential aides, against what they describe as rampant anti-Semitism and left-wing ideology on campus.

However, some have praised Harvard's stance against the Trump administration, and questions have arisen about the reasons behind the prominent educational institution's resistance to US government decisions.

It's worth noting that the US government announced at the end of last March that it intended to strip Harvard University of $9 billion in federal aid following a comprehensive review.

Trump vs. Harvard

US President Donald Trump continued his vicious attacks on Harvard University, describing it as no longer a decent place for education, following its refusal to submit to broad government oversight until at least the end of 2028.

In an angry post on his Truth Social platform on April 16, Trump said, “Harvard is a joke, teaches Hate and Stupidity, and should no longer receive Federal Funds.”

He also threatened to strip it of its tax exempt status as a nonprofit educational institution due to what he considered uncooperative behavior in cases related to anti-Semitism on campus.

The White House quickly responded to Trump's escalation, announcing a freeze on $2.2 billion in grants to the university over the coming years, along with a freeze on $60 million in other government contracts, most of which support medical and scientific research.

In an official statement, the U.S. Department of Education described the situation on campus as unacceptable, emphasizing that the harassment of Jewish students is an intolerable transgression.

It noted that the Joint Task Force on Combating Antisemitism—recently established by Trump—was the one that recommended the freeze on aid to Harvard.

The decision comes after the university refused to implement a set of conditions set by the Trump administration, including changes to governance and hiring policies, stricter admissions procedures, and the end of inclusion and diversity efforts, unlike many other universities that have caved under intense pressure from the White House.

The Trump administration also demanded that the university vet international students to prevent admissions of those hostile to American values and report foreign students who violate its code of conduct to federal immigration authorities.

Harvard President Alan Garber announced in a letter to students and faculty that the university had refused to comply with the Trump administration's demands, stressing that the university would not negotiate its independence or constitutional rights.

He noted that the demands made by the Department of Education on April 11 would allow the federal government to control the Harvard community and threaten the university's values as a private institution dedicated to the production and dissemination of knowledge.

“No government should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” he said.

Constitutional Rights

In a new escalation, the Department of Homeland Security has threatened to bar Harvard University from accepting foreign students if it does not comply with Trump's demands for government oversight, according to a statement reported by Reuters on April 17.

Foreign students make up 27.2% of Harvard's current student body, according to the university's website.

On April 16, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced the cancellation of two Department of Homeland Security grants totaling more than $2.7 million to Harvard.

She said in a statement, “This action follows President Trump's decision to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status because of its espousing of an extremist ideology.”

In protest, the Harvard Faculty Association filed a federal lawsuit accusing the government of political racketeering and misusing federal funding to suppress freedom of thought and education.

“The First Amendment does not permit government officials to use the power of their office to silence critics and suppress speech they dislike,” said Andrew Manuel Crespo, a Harvard Law professor and general counsel for the Harvard Faculty Association chapter, in a statement.

In a related development, Harvard attorneys Robert Hur and William Burke confirmed that the university has already implemented numerous changes over the past 15 months, including improving security and safety measures.

They also argued that the government's demands were unconstitutional and illegal, and objected to the requirement that Harvard agree to the terms or risk losing billions of dollars.

They added that the demands also extend to separately incorporated, independently operating medical and research hospitals that perform life-saving work on behalf of their patients.

This is not the first time Harvard has faced Trump's policies. In 2020, the university, along with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration's decision to revoke visas for foreign students who completed their education remotely, forcing the government to back down.

That same year, Harvard was forced to return $9 million it received under the COVID-19 relief plan following public pressure from Trump, who said the world's richest university did not need taxpayer money.

It's worth noting that Harvard is no ordinary educational institution; it has graduated eight US presidents, and its alumni hold hundreds of positions in Congress, senior judicial positions, and successive administrations.

For example, the 117th Congress (2021–2023) included more than 50 members who are Harvard alumni.

Political Blackmail

Observers considered Harvard's rejection of Trump's demands to be one of the most daring decisions in the face of what they called unprecedented political interference to limit the independence of university education.

In addition, Harvard's decision served as an incentive for a number of law firms, media outlets, and other targets of the White House, including those that had previously succumbed to Trump's pressure, to continue their resistance.

Following Harvard's public stance, Columbia University's interim president, Claire Shipman, said in a statement that the university would reject any excessive government coordination, saying, “Any agreement that would require us to surrender our independence and freedom of expression as an educational institution.”

MIT, Princeton University, and other universities have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy to prevent cuts in federal research grants.

Stanford University President Jonathan Levin and Wesleyan University President Michael Roth have both expressed support for Harvard and pledged to resist Trump.

Many students and alumni have also praised Harvard's decision to stand firm against the Trump administration, despite its potential consequences.

Former President Barack Obama, a Harvard alumnus, called Trump's move reckless and hailed Harvard as a model for other institutions of higher learning.

Another former alumnus warned Harvard that any compromise with Trump was an aggressive attempt to take over the university, noting that Trump's real concern was not alleged anti-Semitism, but rather an attempt to subjugate political enemies.

The Wall Street Journal emphasized that while Harvard's stance may exact a heavy political and financial price, it has made it a symbol of academic resistance to government interference in university affairs.

In turn, commentator David Ignatius, in an article published in the Washington Post, described Harvard's stance as heroic and noble in the face of the Trump administration's humiliating political and economic blackmail.

He emphasized that freedom is not free and that defending it is a duty, and Harvard has undertaken this task with rare courage.

In turn, Washington-based activist Omar Taha explained in a statement to Al-Estiklal that “the Trump administration has long claimed that the targeted universities are harboring anti-Semitism, but its hostility has deeper roots than the unrest linked to Israel's war on Gaza alone.”

“For decades, many Republicans have looked with disdain at the elite of higher education, troubled by affirmative action admissions programs, high tuition costs, and the views of liberal professors,” he said.

“As Harvard prepares for a lengthy legal battle, the academic dispute is expected to become the latest chapter in Trump's ideological battle against liberal institutions as part of his campaign to reshape the American cultural landscape in line with his hardline conservative vision,” Mr. Taha added.

It is noteworthy that the Trump administration is waging a wide-ranging campaign against dozens of prestigious American academic institutions by threatening to cut federal funding for research and educational programs, which totals nearly $60 billion annually.

Approximately 60 US universities have recently received official warnings from the Department of Education that they may face sanctions if discriminatory practices against Jewish students are proven.

Among the most prominent measures taken in this context are the freezing of $400 million in contracts and funding allocated to Columbia University, $1 billion in funding to Cornell University, and $790 million to Northwestern University.

In addition, $200 million in funding allocated to Princeton University, $175 million in research funding to the University of Pennsylvania, and $500 million in funding to Brown University have been frozen.