Harvard and Trump restart talks to potentially end bitter dispute
Harvard representatives sought a meeting after other higher education leaders expressed hope that it – on behalf of academia – would reengage with the administration. PHOTO: SOPHIE PARK/NYTIMES
WASHINGTON - Harvard University and the Trump administration have restarted talks to potentially settle the acrimonious dispute that led President Donald Trump to wage a far-reaching attack on the school and raised stark questions about the federal government's place in higher education, according to three people briefed on the negotiations.
The discussions began again this week at a meeting in the White House. At the meeting, Harvard representatives showed White House officials a PowerPoint presentation that laid out measures the school has taken on anti-Semitism , viewpoint diversity and admissions.
In turn, the White House signalled other steps it would like for Harvard to take on those subjects and later sent a letter laying out conditions that could resolve the conflict, according to one of the people.
It is unclear how Harvard plans to respond to the letter. A university spokesperson declined to comment on the matter.
Harvard representatives sought a meeting after other higher education leaders expressed hope that it – on behalf of academia – would reengage with the administration. And Harvard's outreach came after Education Secretary Linda McMahon publicly raised the prospect of negotiations with a university she routinely criticised . Harvard officials sensed an opening and suggested a briefing on steps the school has taken in recent years, two of the people said.
It is unclear how close both sides are to a potential deal and the exact terms any final agreement would entail. In a post on Truth Social, Mr Trump said it was 'very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so.'
Two people briefed on the discussions said it was highly unlikely a deal would be reached in the next week.
Harvard has been widely praised by Democrats, academics, its alumni and democracy advocates for fighting the Trump administration. But top Harvard officials, according to two people briefed on the matter, have become increasingly convinced in recent weeks that the school has little choice but to try to strike a deal with the White House.
The Harvard officials believe that if the university remains at odds with the administration that it is likely to become far smaller and less ambitious as Trump tries to keep pummelling it with funding cuts, federal investigations and limits on visas for international students.
Now, the school may find itself having to explain a deal with Mr Trump.
One person close to Harvard said that while the school was back at the negotiating table, it would not compromise its values or its First Amendment rights in any deal with the administration.
Others briefed on the discussions laid out a broad framework for a possible pact. Under one approach being discussed, the administration would restore a major portion of the billions in federal research funding that it stripped from Harvard this spring. It would also cease pursuit of a range of legal actions against Harvard, including its quest to bar international students who make up about a quarter of the university's enrolment , according to one of the people.
In exchange, Harvard would agree to take even more aggressive action than it already has to address issues such as anti-Semitism , race and viewpoint diversity. The White House has pushed Harvard to make new commitments to change its admissions and hiring practices, one of the people close to the negotiations said.
Whatever the outcome, the White House's direct involvement, one of the people said, signalled the seriousness of the talks.
The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing negotiations that were supposed to remain private.
Harvard's decision to reopen talks with the administration is a sharp departure from how it has handled its battle with Mr Trump since April. That month, the school cut off discussions with the administration after it received a letter – which the administration later claimed was accidentally sent – that made a series of extraordinary demands that the school believed would have compromised its independence.
The White House, according to one person briefed on the negotiations, hopes that an agreement with Harvard might serve as a framework for other elite colleges to strike deals with Mr Trump. Other schools have been in discussions with the Trump administration about making deals that would keep their federal funding intact and avoid the president's ire, two of the people said.
Word of the negotiations involving Harvard emerged soon after a federal judge in Boston blocked the government's effort to bar international students from the university.
In a social media post on June 20 , Mr Trump hyped the prospects of an accord, asserting that 'if a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country'.
Although the Trump administration has targeted other elite universities in recent months, its clash with Harvard has been the most bitter.
The nation's oldest and wealthiest university, the administration contended, was a mismanaged well of bigotry that did not deserve any of the federal research money that has helped power American academia since around World War II. Although Harvard acknowledged assorted shortcomings, university leaders were stunned April 11 when the Trump administration proposed broad power for the government over the school.
Among other conditions, the administration wanted Harvard to establish 'merit based' hiring and admissions policies, and to see the influence of its faculty curbed. It sought a review for 'viewpoint diversity,' the shutdown of any programmes related to diversity, equity and inclusion, and an outside review to examine 'those programmes and departments that most fuel anti-Semitic harassment or reflect ideological capture.'
The government also asked for Harvard to adjust its 'recruitment, screening and admissions of international students,' audits of university data and reports 'at least until the end of 2028' about the university's compliance with the Trump administration's conditions.
Before the letter, Harvard leaders had been receptive to reaching some kind of truce with the government, which had been sounding warnings about the university's relationship with Washington. But school officials recoiled at the missive, publicly rejected it, lost billions in federal funding and then headed to court.
Negotiations collapsed, and the furore between the administration and Harvard only mounted. The government launched a volley of attacks against the university, including repeated efforts to block Harvard from enrolling international students, a threat against its tax-exempt status and a Justice Department investigation that invoked the False Claims Act, a law usually employed to target entities that try to defraud the government.
Meanwhile, the government kept cutting off research money and warning Harvard not to bother applying for funds in the future.
Harvard officials outwardly projected defiance and depicted their fight against the government as a righteous confrontation over academic independence. But inside the university, top leaders were surveying the landscape and seeing few optimal outcomes.
Even if the university prevailed in court, some came to believe, it could still be dogged by fights with an administration not scheduled to leave office until 2029. And the university's $53 billion endowment was loaded with restrictions, leaving Harvard more financially vulnerable than a cursory glance at its books perhaps suggested.
Harvard leaders were keenly aware of perceptions of the government's talks with Columbia University, which agreed to a range of Trump administration demands in its continuing quest for the resumption of $400 million in cancelled grants and contracts. Columbia's approach had been derided as capitulation.
But some inside Harvard have weighed whether a settlement now – after a furious fight with the government that included some interim legal victories for the university – would leave the school less exposed to criticism than it would have if it had cut a deal months ago.
Trump administration officials had been open to talks for weeks, even as the White House taunted and threatened the school with new actions.
Until recently, though, Harvard's top board resisted talks. The members directed the school's battalion of lawyers, many of them fixtures of conservative legal circles, not to engage with the government.
The calculus has since shifted, in parallel with a handful of courtroom successes for Harvard and Mr Trump's public venting that the university had drawn a favourable judge.
Any deal, though, is certain to be closely scrutinised by the university's students, faculty members, donors and alumni.
In an interview in May, Dr Lawrence H. Summers, a former Harvard president, was reluctant to assess any potential agreement before its terms were known.
He said, though, that 'it would be a tragedy if Harvard resolved this in a way that gave support and encouragement to the idea of extralegal extortion.'
Until June 20 , there had been no public signal of active discussions between Harvard and the government. The judge in Boston, Ms Allison D. Burroughs, an appointee of President Barack Obama, has scheduled a hearing for July 21 to hear more extensive arguments in Harvard's case about cuts to its research funding.
Mr Trump himself has routinely bashed Harvard in public and in private. As he concluded lunch in the West Wing on April 1, he mused about his government blocking every cent it could from flowing to Harvard. Later on, he would assail Harvard online as 'a JOKE' that 'teaches Hate and Stupidity, and should no longer receive Federal Funds.' During the spring, he floated a revocation of Harvard's tax-exempt status and an idea to give its research money to trade schools.
On June 20 , though, after his government had resumed talks with the university, the president was far more generous in his assessment of Harvard's leaders.
'They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right,' he wrote. NYTIMES
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
Two days of terror: How the Minnesota shooter evaded police and got caught
FILE PHOTO: A handout photo posted by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office appears to show Vance Luther Boelter, 57, the suspected gunman in the shooting deaths of a Minnesota Democratic state lawmaker and her husband, in custody, at an unidentified location, released June 15, 2025. Ramsey County Sheriff's Office via Facebook/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo Two days of terror: How the Minnesota shooter evaded police and got caught NEW HOPE, Minnesota - Vance Boelter's disguise wasn't perfect. The silicone mask was somewhat loose-fitting and his SUV's license plate simply read "POLICE" in black letters. But it was good enough on a poorly lit suburban street in the dead of night. At 2:36 a.m. on Saturday, 30 minutes after authorities say Boelter shot and seriously injured Minnesota State Senator John Hoffman and his wife, he paused behind the wheel of the SUV near the home of another senator, Ann Rest, in the city of New Hope. The SUV was stocked with weapons, including AK-47 assault rifles, as well as fliers advertising a local anti-Trump rally scheduled for later Saturday and a written list of names of people he appeared to be targeting. Senator Rest, prosecutors would later say, was among those Boelter set out to kill on June 14. As Boelter sat in the SUV down the street from Rest's home, another police car - this one an actual police car - approached. A female officer from the New Hope police department, after hearing about the Hoffman shootings, had come out to check on Rest. Seeing the SUV, complete with flashing lights and police-style decals, she believed the man inside was a fellow officer. But when she attempted to speak to him - one officer greeting another - she got no response. Instead, the man inside the SUV with police markings simply stared ahead. The New Hope officer drove on, deciding to go ahead and check on Rest. Rest would later say the New Hope officer's initiative probably saved her life, an opinion shared by New Hope Police Chief Timothy Hoyt. "With limited information, she went up there on her own to check on the welfare of our senator," Hoyt told Reuters. "She did the right thing." The brief interaction in New Hope underscored the carefully planned nature of Boelter's pre-dawn rampage and how his impersonation of a police officer, including body armor, a badge and a tactical vest, confounded the initial attempts to stop him. After the encounter with the New Hope officer, Boelter, 57, drove away from the scene, moving on to his next target. Police would pursue him for another 43 hours. In the process, they would draw in a phalanx of state and federal agencies, in what ranks as the largest manhunt in Minnesota history and added to the sense of disorientation in a nation already grappling with protests over immigration, the forcible removal of a U.S. Senator from a press conference and a rare military parade in Washington. Federal prosecutors say they may seek the death penalty for Boelter, who has been charged with murdering two people and trying to kill two others, in what Governor Tim Walz has called a "politically motivated" attack. Prosecutors said they are still investigating the motive and whether any others were involved. Boelter has yet to enter a plea. Manny Atwal, a public defender representing Boelter, said he was reviewing the case and declined to comment. This reconstruction of the manhunt is based on court documents, statements by law enforcement officials, and interviews with a Boelter friend, local police officers, lawmakers, and residents of the impacted neighborhoods. While the events unfolded like something out of a TV crime drama, there were parallels with past shooting sprees, criminal justice experts said. James Fitzgerald, a former FBI criminal profiler, said he would not be surprised if Boelter studied a mass shooting in Canada in 2020, when a gunman posing as a police officer killed 22 people in the province of Nova Scotia. "These guys always do research beforehand. They want to see how other killers were successful, how they got caught," said Fitzgerald, who helped the FBI capture the "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski in 1996. "And, of course, a way you're going to buy yourself some time is to pose as a police officer." HOFFMAN SHOOTING The violence began at the Hoffman's brick split-level home in Champlin, a leafy, middle-class suburb of Minneapolis. With his emergency lights flashing, Boelter pulled into the driveway just after 2:00 a.m. and knocked on the door. "This is the police. Open the door," Boelter shouted repeatedly, according to an FBI affidavit. Senator Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, soon determined Boelter was not a real police officer. Boelter shot Senator Hoffman nine times, and then fired on Yvette, who shielded her daughter from being hit. As Boelter fled the scene, the daughter called 911. The Hoffmans were on a target list of more than 45 federal and state elected officials in Minnesota, all Democrats, acting U.S. Attorney Joseph H. Thompson told a briefing on Monday. Boelter voted for President Donald Trump, was a Christian and did not like abortion, according to his part-time roommate, David Carlson. Carlson said Boelter did not seem angry about politics. Thompson said Boelter "stalked his victims like prey" but that the writings he left behind did not point to a coherent motive. "His crimes are the stuff of nightmares," he said. "His crimes are the stuff of nightmares," Thompson said. After the Hoffman's, the next address plugged into Boelter's GPS system was a lawmaker about 9 miles away in the Minneapolis suburb of Maple Grove. Surveillance cameras from the home of State Representative Kristin Bahner show a masked Boelter ringing the doorbell at 2:24 a.m. and shouting "Open the door. This is the police. We have a warrant," the FBI affidavit says. Bahner and her family were not at home. From there, Boelter moved on to New Hope and the close encounter with the officer who had dispatched to Rest's home. After that, he wasn't seen by police again until he arrived at the residence of Melissa Hortman, the top Democrat in the state House, in Brooklyn Park. Sensing that Hortman might be a target, Brooklyn Park police officers had decided to check on her. When they arrived at 3:30 a.m. they saw a black Ford Explorer outside her house, its police-style lights flashing. Boelter was near the front door. When Boelter saw the officers exit their squad car, he fired at them. He then ran through the front door on the house, where he killed Melissa and Mark Hortman, her husband. 'DAD WENT TO WAR' When Boelter left the Hortman's home, he abandoned his fake-police SUV. Inside the car, police found a 9mm handgun, three AK-47 assault rifles, fliers advertising a local anti-Trump "No Kings" rally and a notebook with names of people who appear to have been targets, according to court documents. From that point, Boelter was on the run. Little has been revealed about his movements during the period, although police say he visited his part-time residence in north Minneapolis. He also sent texts. In one, to his family's group chat, Boelter writes, "Dad went to war last night". In another, to a close friend, Boelter says he may be dead soon. Police also know that by early morning on Saturday Boelter had met a man at a Minneapolis bus stop who agreed to sell him an e-bike and a Buick sedan for $900. The two drove to a bank where Boelter withdrew $2,200 from his account. A security camera shows Boelter wearing a cowboy hat. But it took until 10:00 a.m. on Sunday for authorities to close in. Police searching the area near Boelter's family home in the rural community of Green Isle, discovered the abandoned Buick, along with a cowboy hat and handwritten letter to the FBI in which Boelter admitted to the shootings, prosecutors said. Law enforcement scrambled to set up a perimeter surrounding the area, SWAT teams and search dogs were deployed, and drones were put in the air. It was the trail camera of a resident, however, that provided the final clue, capturing an image of Boelter around 7:00 p.m., allowing officers to narrow their search. Two hours later, the pursuit ended with Boelter crawling to police. He was armed but surrendered without a fight. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Straits Times
3 hours ago
- Straits Times
Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to reporters upon his arrival at Morristown Municipal Airport in Morristown, New Jersey, U.S., June 20, 2025. REUTERS/Ken Cedeno/File Photo ISLAMABAD - Pakistan said on Saturday it would recommend U.S. President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, an accolade that he has said he craves, for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan. Some analysts in Pakistan said the move might persuade Trump to think again about potentially joining Israel in striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Pakistan has condemned Israel's action as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that U.S. diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. "President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation," Pakistan said. "This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker." Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has repeatedly said that he's willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted. But his stance has upended U.S. policy in South Asia, which had favored India as a counterweight to China, and put in question previously close relations between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In a social media post on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: "I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do." Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the U.S. leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Trump's planned meeting with Modi at the G7 summit in Canada last week did not take place after the U.S. president left early, but the two later spoke by phone, in which Modi said "India does not and will never accept mediation" in its dispute with Pakistan, according to the Indian government. Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the Senate Defence Committee in Pakistan's parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified. "Trump is good for Pakistan," he said. "If this panders to Trump's ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time." But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump's support for Israel's war in Gaza has inflamed passions. "Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize," said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talk show host, in a post on X. 'And what if he starts to kiss Modi on both cheeks again after a few months?" REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.


CNA
4 hours ago
- CNA
Europeans seek 'digital sovereignty' as US tech firms embrace Trump
BERLIN :At a market stall in Berlin run by charity Topio, volunteers help people who want to purge their phones of the influence of U.S. tech firms. Since Donald Trump's inauguration, the queue for their services has grown. Interest in European-based digital services has jumped in recent months, data from digital market intelligence company Similarweb shows. More people are looking for e-mail, messaging and even search providers outside the United States. The first months of Trump's second presidency have shaken some Europeans' confidence in their long-time ally, after he signalled his country would step back from its role in Europe's security and then launched a trade war. "It's about the concentration of power in U.S. firms," said Topio's founder Michael Wirths, as his colleague installed on a customer's phone a version of the Android operating system without hooks into the Google ecosystem. Wirths said the type of people coming to the stall had changed: "Before, it was people who knew a lot about data privacy. Now it's people who are politically aware and feel exposed." Tesla chief Elon Musk, who also owns social media company X, was a leading adviser to the U.S. president before the two fell out, while the bosses of Amazon, Meta and Google-owner Alphabet took prominent spots at Trump's inauguration in January. Days before Trump took office, outgoing president Joe Biden had warned of an oligarchic "tech industrial complex" threatening democracy. Berlin-based search engine Ecosia says it has benefited from some customers' desire to avoid U.S. counterparts like Microsoft's Bing or Google, which dominates web searches and is also the world's biggest email provider. "The worse it gets, the better it is for us," founder Christian Kroll said of Ecosia, whose sales pitch is that it spends its profits on environmental projects. Similarweb data shows the number of queries directed to Ecosia from the European Union has risen 27 per cent year-on-year and the company says it has 1 per cent of the German search engine market. But its 122 million visits from the 27 EU countries in February were dwarfed by 10.3 billion visits to Google, whose parent Alphabet made revenues of about $100 billion from Europe, the Middle East and Africa in 2024 - nearly a third of its $350 billion global turnover. Non-profit Ecosia earned 3.2 million euros ($3.65 million) in April, of which 770,000 euros was spent on planting 1.1 million trees. Google declined to comment for this story. Reuters could not determine whether major U.S. tech companies have lost any market share to local rivals in Europe. DIGITAL SOVEREIGNTY The search for alternative providers accompanies a debate in Europe about "digital sovereignty" - the idea that reliance on companies from an increasingly isolationist United States is a threat to Europe's economy and security. "Ordinary people, the kind of people who would never have thought it was important they were using an American service are saying, 'hang on!'," said UK-based internet regulation expert Maria Farrell. "My hairdresser was asking me what she should switch to." Use in Europe of Swiss-based ProtonMail rose 11.7 per cent year-on-year to March compared to a year ago, according to Similarweb, while use of Alphabet's Gmail, which has some 70 per cent of the global email market, slipped 1.9 per cent. ProtonMail, which offers both free and paid-for services, said it had seen an increase in users from Europe since Trump's re-election, though it declined to give a number. "My household is definitely disengaging," said British software engineer Ken Tindell, citing weak U.S. data privacy protections as one factor. Trump's vice president JD Vance shocked European leaders in February by accusing them - at a conference usually known for displays of transatlantic unity - of censoring free speech and failing to control immigration. In May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio threatened visa bans for people who "censor" speech by Americans, including on social media, and suggested the policy could target foreign officials regulating U.S. tech companies. U.S. social media companies like Facebook and Instagram parent Meta have said the European Union's Digital Services Act amounts to censorship of their platforms. EU officials say the Act will make the online environment safer by compelling tech giants to tackle illegal content, including hate speech and child sexual abuse material. Greg Nojeim, director of the Security and Surveillance Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said Europeans' concerns about the U.S. government accessing their data, whether stored on devices or in the cloud, were justified. Not only does U.S. law permit the government to search devices of anyone entering the country, it can compel disclosure of data that Europeans outside the U.S. store or transmit through U.S. communications service providers, Nojeim said. MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? Germany's new government is itself making efforts to reduce exposure to U.S. tech, committing in its coalition agreement to make more use of open-source data formats and locally-based cloud infrastructure. Regional governments have gone further - in conservative-run Schleswig-Holstein, on the Danish border, all IT used by the public administration must run on open-source software. Berlin has also paid for Ukraine to access a satellite-internet network operated by France's Eutelsat instead of Musk's Starlink. But with modern life driven by technology, "completely divorcing U.S. tech in a very fundamental way is, I would say, possibly not possible," said Bill Budington of U.S. digital rights nonprofit the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Everything from push notifications to the content delivery networks powering many websites and how internet traffic is routed relies largely on U.S. companies and infrastructure, Budington noted. Both Ecosia and French-based search engine Qwant depend in part on search results provided by Google and Microsoft's Bing, while Ecosia runs on cloud platforms, some hosted by the very same tech giants it promises an escape from. Nevertheless, a group on messaging board Reddit called BuyFromEU has 211,000 members. "Just cancelled my Dropbox and will switch to Proton Drive," read one post. Mastodon, a decentralised social media service developed by German programmer Eugen Rochko, enjoyed a rush of new users two years ago when Musk bought Twitter, later renamed X. But it remains a niche service. Signal, a messaging app run by a U.S. nonprofit foundation, has also seen a surge in installations from Europe. Similarweb's data showed a 7 per cent month-on-month increase in Signal usage in March, while use of Meta's WhatsApp was static. Meta declined to comment for this story. Signal did not respond to an e-mailed request for comment. But this kind of conscious self-organising is unlikely on its own to make a dent in Silicon Valley's European dominance, digital rights activist Robin Berjon told Reuters. "The market is too captured," he said. "Regulation is needed as well."