In a powerful political move, the Trump administration froze over $2.3 billion in federal funding for Harvard University. The reason? Harvard refused to comply with a series of federal demands aimed at reshaping its internal policies.
The government ordered the university to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, shift to merit-based admissions only, ban protest masks on campus, and cooperate more closely with immigration authorities.
Harvard rejected these changes, calling them an unlawful intrusion into academic independence. “We won’t let political pressure define our values,” said Harvard’s president Alan Garber. To cushion the impact, the university issued $750 million in bonds.
Former President Barack Obama applauded Harvard’s response, calling it “a bold defense of free academic expression.” Meanwhile, other top universities like Columbia and Cornell are feeling the heat, with some choosing to comply to protect their funding.
The situation has ignited a legal and cultural battle. The American Association of University Professors has sued the federal government, accusing it of using civil rights laws to silence campus voices.
This isn’t just about one university. It’s about the future of higher education in the U.S.—who controls it, what values it promotes, and how far political influence should reach into the classroom.