For months, the Trump administration has intensified its pressure on American colleges and universities to align with its political and cultural agenda — or face severe financial consequences.
At the core of this campaign is a drive to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, restrict free speech by cracking down on campus protests, and criminalize student activism. The administration seeks to enforce ideological conformity, reshaping curriculum and hiring practices to counter what it perceives as liberal bias in higher education.
The main source of leverage? Federal funding. Trump has frozen billions in research grants and contracts to institutions that refuse to comply with these demands. Universities have also been threatened with the loss of their tax-exempt status and the ability to enroll international students.
Enter Harvard University — America’s oldest and most prestigious academic institution has stood firm. When the administration froze $2.2 billion in research grants and $60 million in federal contracts, Harvard filed suit, calling the move retaliatory and unconstitutional. The university argued that the freeze violates First Amendment rights and federal administrative law.
Harvard also condemned the threat to revoke its tax-exempt status, warning that such action would jeopardize financial aid, medical research, and scientific innovation. It labeled the move unlawful, politically motivated, and dangerous to the future of higher education.
When the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) attempted to revoke Harvard’s certification to enroll foreign students, the university sued again — this time citing irreparable harm. With students and scholars from over 140 countries making up 25 percent of its student body, Harvard emphasized the critical role international contributors play in its research ecosystem.
Faculty warned that losing these minds would cripple progress in fields like Alzheimer’s research, climate science, and infectious disease. As Harvard’s President Alan Garber put it, “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.”
Further, Trump’s Departments of Education and Health and Human Services notified Harvard’s accreditor — the New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE) — that the university had allegedly violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by showing “deliberate indifference” to antisemitic harassment.
The threat to accreditation was real. Losing it would disqualify Harvard from receiving federal student aid — often termed a “death sentence” for universities. “Very few institutions could continue to enroll students, especially lower and middle-income students, without having those students have the ability to borrow or get grants to go to those schools,” said Jon Fansmith of the American Council on Education.
Harvard pushed back, forcefully rejecting the allegations and publishing its Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias Report, signaling a renewed commitment to tolerance and civil discourse. NECHE affirmed Harvard’s accreditation, pending continued efforts to uphold federal standards.
This high-stakes battle is set to reach a critical juncture on 21 July when the US District Court in Massachusetts hears oral arguments on Harvard’s lawsuit. The university is asking Judge Allison Burroughs to issue a summary judgment — unfreezing $2.5 billion in research funding and halting further punitive action. But this isn’t just Harvard’s fight. It’s a test of how far the federal government can go in shaping university policy through political coercion.
Harvard — alma mater of eight US presidents and steward of a proud 387-year legacy — has long stood as a pillar of American intellectual life. To acquiesce under political duress would be to abandon its founding principle of Veritas, Latin for truth, and with it, the university’s commitment to intellectual integrity, free inquiry, and the fearless pursuit of knowledge. As Harvard faces down unprecedented federal pressure, its resistance affirms not just the sanctity of scholarship — but the soul of a free society.