Harvard battles Trump administration in court over $2.6bn funding cut
US district judge Allison Burroughs heard arguments from both sides in Boston, Massachusetts, in what is known as a summary judgment in the civil case.
Harvard is arguing that while it acknowledges there have been instances of antisemitism on campus, there is no link between antisemitism and the vital medical and scientific research the university undertakes.
Instead, the Ivy League school says it is being pressured into capitulating to the government's demands, arguing that its First Amendment rights are being violated.
"This case involves the government's efforts to use the withholding of federal funding as leverage to gain control of academic decisionmaking at Harvard," the university said in its complaint.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
"All told, the tradeoff put to Harvard and other universities is clear: allow the government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution's ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions."
Meanwhile, the government is arguing that the funding freeze is justified because Harvard has not sufficiently tackled antisemitism on campus.
Whilst Burroughs didn't issue a ruling at Monday's hearing, US President Donald Trump still chose to call her a "TOTAL DISASTER."
Burroughs issued an injunction in June to prevent the government from banning international students from attending the university.
He noted she ruled in favour of Harvard in the past, saying they would appeal any unfavourable outcomes.
"When she rules against us, we will IMMEDIATELY appeal, and WIN," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.
'Real-life consequences'
The lawsuit, originally filed in April to challenge the $2.6bn federal funding freeze, marked an escalation in Harvard's fight to maintain academic autonomy in the face of the Trump administration's demands.
In a letter to the Harvard community at the time, the university's president, Alan M Garber, said the administration's "illegal demands" would impose "unprecedented and improper control over the university".
Garber also said the administration's threats would have "stark real-life consequences for patients, students, faculty, staff, researchers, and the standing of American higher education in the world".
What really happened at college campuses according to Jewish students Read More »
In its complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, the university said that within hours of receiving a funding freeze, the university began receiving stop work orders which "put vital medical, scientific, technological, and other research at risk', as well as news that the government was planning to pull an additional $1bn of funding for health research.
The complaint also said the government had threatened to terminate $8.7bn in federal funding to five hospitals in Boston - "independent corporate entities" that are "not under Harvard's control", calling it an arbitrary decision.
More critically, it said that the government "has not - and cannot - identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America's position as a global leader in innovation."
Medical research said to be in jeopardy includes improving the prospects of children who survive cancer, understanding at the molecular level how cancer spreads throughout the body, and predicting the spread of infectious disease outbreaks.
The court case is the latest chapter of the tussle between Harvard University and the government.
The university is also taking the government to court after it revoked the institution's ability to host international students.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
25 minutes ago
- Khaleej Times
Syria says meeting with Israeli officials sought to 'contain escalation'
A Syrian diplomatic source said Saturday (July 26) that a US-mediated meeting with Israeli officials in Paris sought to "contain the escalation" after recent sectarian violence in southern Syria prompted Israeli intervention. Israel launched strikes this month on Damascus and Druze-majority Sweida province, saying it was acting both in support of the religious minority and to enforce its demands for a demilitarised southern Syria. The Syrian diplomatic source told state television on Saturday that the Paris meeting "brought together a delegation from the foreign ministry and the general intelligence service with the Israeli side", and addressed "recent security developments and attempts to contain the escalation in southern Syria". Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels. On Thursday (July 24), US special envoy for Syria Tom Barrack had said he held talks with unspecified Syrian and Israeli officials in Paris. A senior diplomat had previously told AFP that Barrack would be facilitating talks between Damascus's Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani and Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer. According to the source cited by state TV, the meeting "addressed the possibility of reactivating the disengagement agreement with international guarantees, while demanding the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from points where they recently advanced". After the overthrow of longtime Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad in December, Israel sent troops into a UN-patrolled buffer zone that used to separate the countries' forces in the strategic Golan Heights. It has since conducted incursions deeper into southern Syria, demanding the area's total demilitarisation. Damascus has previously confirmed holding indirect contacts with Israel seeking a return to the 1974 disengagement agreement that created the buffer zone. The Paris meeting "did not result in any final agreements but rather represented initial consultations that aimed to reduce tensions and reopen communication channels in light of the ongoing escalation since early December", the diplomatic source said. More meetings were planned, the source said, adding that the Syrian side emphasised that the country's unity and sovereignty were non-negotiable. "Sweida and its people are an integral part of the Syrian state," the delegation said, according to the source. Syrian and Israeli officials had previously met in Baku on July 12, according to a diplomatic source in Damascus, coinciding with a visit to Azerbaijan by Syria's interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa. The two countries have technically been at war since 1948, and Israel has occupied the Golan Heights, which it seized from Syria, since 1967. After Assad's ouster, Israel carried out hundreds of air strikes in Syria to prevent key military assets from falling into the hands of the new Islamist-led administration.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Political solution without Palestinian statehood is 'cynical and illegal', says ICJ lawyer
With France saying it will recognise Palestine in September, making it the first G7 nation to do so, other countries such as the UK and Germany, which are holding out, have called for a political solution to the Palestine issue. That two-state solution between Israel and Palestine, however, cannot be reached without recognising Palestine as a state, Ardi Imseis, a professor of law at Queen's University in Canada, told The National. Mr Imseis is a former UN official and has represented states before the International Court of Justice, which last year found Israel to be under an obligation to end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory and make reparations for the damage caused. "Recognition is a political prerogative of states," he said. They can urge for a political resolution to the problem without recognising one or the other states, Mr Imseis said, although that "does not make sense". "This is because if you have a two-state solution, one would assume you would need to have two states be part of that solution," he said. Under international law, the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination in a state of their own. "This right is peremptory and inalienable," he said. The international community has an obligation to help Palestinians realise that right, he added. "However, if states make the emergence of a Palestinian state contingent on successful negotiations with Israel, then, in effect, that places Israel in a position of holding a veto power over the exercise by the Palestinian people of their right of self-determination," he said. "It's a cyclical, cynical and ultimately illegal policy." Mr Imseis said that Israel was a "bad faith illegal occupier" with no intention to allow the establishment of a Palestinian state. Following France's announcement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at French President Emmanuel Macron and said that a Palestinian state would create a "launch pad to annihilate Israel". France, the US and the UK are three of the five members of the UN Security Council with veto power, if and when the next vote comes to admit the state of Palestine to UN membership. The US used its veto the last time such a vote took place, on April 18, 2024. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who is under increasing pressure from 220 Members of Parliament who wrote to him urging him to recognise a Palestinian state, said he does support the move. But, he said, it should be part of a "wider plan" which results in security for Palestinians and Israelis. At least 140 out of the world's 193 members of the UN General Assembly recognise Palestine as a state. In 2012, the General Assembly gave Palestine non-member observer state status. "That means, that within the UN system, the state of Palestine already exists," Mr Imseis said.
Al Etihad
2 hours ago
- Al Etihad
Trump golfs on first day of his visit to Scotland
26 July 2025 17:13 EDINBURGH, Scotland (Reuters) US President Donald Trump kept a low profile on his Scottish golf course on Saturday, ahead of meetings with top British and European arrived in Scotland on Friday, with hundreds of people on hand to watch the arrival in Glasgow of Air Force One, the presidential told reporters that he will visit his two golf properties in Scotland - one in Turnberry on the west coast, where he is playing on Saturday and the other near Aberdeen. He is also due to meet British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Scottish leader John Swinney and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, whom he called a "highly respected woman".Trump was spotted on the golf course on Saturday morning, but had no public events in his schedule. Reporters and supporters were kept away by enhanced security. Protests were expected in Aberdeen and Edinburgh, hundreds of miles White House said Trump was golfing on Saturday with his son, Eric Trump, and the US Ambassador to Britain, Warren Stephens, and his son. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was also on the bought the Turnberry property, which includes a hotel and golf course, for $60 million in 2014, in the hope of returning the course to the rotation for the Open Championship, but said his visit was "not about that".Turnberry has been the site of the golf major four times, the most recent being in 2009. It has not hosted the event since then, amid concerns about the lack of accommodation and infrastructure for an event that draws hundreds of thousands. Trump will travel in the coming days to his property near Aberdeen, where he will open a second course named after his mother, Mary Anne MacLeod, who was born and raised on a Scottish island before emigrating to the United States.
