Harvard vs. Trump: What to Know and Why it Matters

Harvard has been at the center of an ongoing battle with the Trump administration over autonomy in higher education. The university received a letter from the federal government in early April stating that it had failed to uphold a status that warrants federal investment. The government demanded that Harvard impose reforms to curb antisemitism and align more closely with the Trump administration’s views.

Harvard refused to meet these criteria, citing the importance of autonomy in a private institution. Harvard President Alan Garber stated, “No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, who they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

In response, the federal government terminated billions of dollars in research grants, mostly from the National Institutes of Health. This will also affect affiliated institutions such as Brigham and Women’s Hospital and MIT.

A massive amount of cutting-edge research comes out of Harvard every year, including new vaccines, treatments to fight childhood cancer, and technologies to enhance national security. By cutting funding, Trump is halting these efforts, which could have saved countless lives. In addition, discontinuing research grants means labs will be shut down, expensive lab equipment will deteriorate, and professors and graduate students will seek other places to continue their work. Halting research is not a temporary or reversible act—it will have long-reaching consequences both for Harvard and for the people the research would have benefited.

In addition to researchers, international students are also largely affected by Trump’s policies. The administration has demanded a full list of foreign students and their information, stating that it needs to decide who to let back into the country and who to block. Additionally, it attempted to revoke Harvard’s ability to sponsor student visas, though this order has been temporarily blocked by a judge. However, as the government ultimately dictates who can and cannot enter the country, Harvard will likely lose many international students in any case.

Financially, this also could spell disaster. International students typically pay higher tuition and receive less scholarship money than domestic students, so by losing that portion of its student body, Harvard’s finances will be hit.

Other institutions, such as Columbia, faced with the loss of millions or billions of dollars in research grants, have caved to Trump’s demands. In Columbia’s case, this includes providing the federal government with a list of student information, banning face masks, and employing officers who can make arrests on campus. Additionally, in an unprecedented level of academic censorship, Columbia met Trump’s requirement to place its Middle East, South Asian and African Studies department under “academic receivership.”

Harvard’s ability to resist giving in to Trump is critical, as it will likely set an example for other institutions. All eyes are on Harvard in its battle against the Trump administration.