In one corner, Harvard University. In the other, the Donald Trump Administration. In the middle, $2.2 billion in frozen or in-process federal transfers, aids, grants, and contracts. Much more is at stake. Freedom of speech, of teaching, of conscience. Autonomy, independence. If one of the largest, perhaps the most prestigious and revered elite institution in the world, one with significant economic power, falls, others will have a hard time continuing to resist.
In less than three months, the Trump Administration has dismissed tens of thousands of officials, closed agencies, restructured entire departments, and plans to cut foreign action in half. It has subdued tech companies, which pay millions to fund Trump's parties or his future presidential library. It has brought law firms to their knees, making them accept humiliating agreements to advise Republicans for free on services worth hundreds of millions of dollars, after being specifically mentioned in executive orders. After drastically reducing the Department of Education, it now has its sights set on major universities.
All part of a very broad campaign in which ideology plays the leading role. For example, the Administration froze up to $400 million in funds, programs, and grants to Columbia University in New York, "due to its inaction against persistent harassment of Jewish students." With the aim of breaking their will, forcing them to meet its demands, such as eliminating departments or creating an internal police force to expel students who violate the rules. The same with Princeton, for $215 million, including five million because their climate research causes "anxiety" in young people. Cornell ($1 billion), Northwestern ($750), Brown ($500 million).
Or $175 million to the University of Pennsylvania due to the participation of a transgender athlete in their swimming program. Another example: the federal prosecutor of Washington D.C. sent a letter to the dean of law at the Georgetown University, which belongs to the Jesuits, threatening that the Government would not hire any of their graduates if they did not stop teaching equality or diversity issues.
Almost all universities that have received letters, calls, and warnings have begun a struggle or negotiation. Harvard as well, hiring a lobby close to the Republican Party or changing the direction of a center for Middle Eastern studies. But now, with its refusal and the lawsuits filed by its professors and unions over the frozen funds, Harvard is the first to take the challenge to another level, stating that it "will not give up its independence or its constitutional rights" and denouncing that Trump's pressures "violate Harvard's rights protected by the First Amendment and exceed the legal limits of governmental authority. Furthermore, it threatens our values as a private institution dedicated to the search, production, and dissemination of knowledge. No government, regardless of the party in power, should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and what areas of study and research they can develop," responded its president, Alan M. Garber, in an open letter.
"Should Harvard perhaps lose its tax-exempt status and be taxed as a political entity if it continues to promote a politically inspired disease, ideology, and terrorism? Remember, tax-exempt status depends entirely on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!" Trump threatened on his social media yesterday.
Harvard, like elite institutions, has an endowment, a fund built through donations and legacies that generates wealth through investments, of over $50 billion, giving it breathing room even if the Government cuts funds for research or hiring. But only 20% of that huge fund is for discretionary expenses. And federal agreements in some years reach up to 15% of the operating budget.
"Harvard has set an example for other higher education institutions, rejecting an illegal and clumsy attempt to suppress academic freedom while taking concrete steps to ensure that all students can benefit from an environment of intellectual research, rigorous debate, and mutual respect. Let's hope that other institutions follow their lead," former President Barack Obama urged in a message on the X network.
In its first 80 days, the Government has demanded that any institution with relationships or contracts with the federal Administration end their equality or diversity policies, eliminate affirmative action criteria, close inclusion programs. Fight against anti-Semitism, which has undoubtedly been a real problem. Or ban transgender individuals from participating in their sports programs. But in Harvard's case, it has gone much further, following Columbia's example. The Executive branch relies on protests against the Gaza war, which it categorizes as acts of anti-Semitism without nuances. What it demands is absolute surrender, which implies not only changing their policies, codes, faculty, programs, and departments but doing so hand in hand with the Government, with its approval, with its premises. It is a request for total surrender, effectively handing over the management power of the country's top university to the White House.
"In recent years, Harvard has not met the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment. However, we appreciate its commitment to addressing these deficiencies and thank them for their collaboration to ensure that the University fulfills its promise," says the letter sent by three government officials. It demands that they reduce the power and influence of students and professors over the University's management; that they create and send lists of foreign students who may have committed conduct violations. That they, in practice, hire more conservative professors. That they change their admission criteria to be more meritocratic, in the sense that Trump understands it, and to prevent "the admission of students hostile to American values and institutions."
Or that before August of this year "adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies and eradicate any preference based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in their hiring, promotion, compensation, and other practices related to faculty, staff, and management. Such adoption and implementation must be lasting and demonstrated through structural and personnel changes. All faculty, both current and future, will be evaluated for plagiarism, and Harvard's plagiarism policy will be systematically applied. All hiring and related data will be shared with the federal Government and will be subject to a thorough audit by it during the reform implementation period, lasting at least until the end of 2028," says one of the paragraphs.
Trump wants total control, over every aspect and detail. And even establishing a mechanism for any student or professor who detects that all those measures and reforms are not being correctly implemented to officially and anonymously report it. The alternative, they say, is not only losing $2.2 billion but up to $9,000 in the coming years in resources for a dozen hospitals and associated medical centers, and the cancellation of signed contracts.
The entire country is now looking to Boston to see what happens. If the resistance succeeds, it can serve as inspiration, an example, a trigger. If Harvard folds, the rest will have a hard time. "Congratulations to Harvard for refusing to give up its constitutional rights in the face of Trump's authoritarianism. Other universities should follow their lead. And instead of doing pro bono work for Trump, cowardly law firms should defend those who believe in the rule of law," urged Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders last night.