logo
Ivy League schools are forking over millions under deals with Trump. Here's where the money's going.

Ivy League schools are forking over millions under deals with Trump. Here's where the money's going.

Boston Globea day ago
Both deals with the Ivy League schools came as they faced complaints they had allowed antisemitism to proliferate on campus during protests against the war in Gaza, as well as allegations they had discriminated against students via diversity-related policies and programs.
Neither Brown nor Columbia in their agreements admitted any wrongdoing — something Harvard has indicated in court fights with the federal government it is also unwilling to do.
Advertisement
The measures the schools adopted to get the government off their backs differ wildly.
Both Columbia and Brown are paying millions to resolve their disputes
Columbia agreed to pay about $200 million to the US Treasury Department over the next three years, as well as another $21 million to address alleged civil rights violations of its Jewish employees.
Congress will then have the power to appropriate those funds — though it's unclear what they will be used for.
In exchange, Columbia will receive many of the research grants the government had previously canceled as early as March, and resolve violations of the law alleged by the federal government. The administration had frozen 'the majority' of the school's $1.3 billion in federal funding, Columbia's president said.
Advertisement
Brown, meanwhile, pledged to give $50 million to state workforce development organizations in Rhode Island that are 'operating in compliance with anti-discrimination laws' over the next 10 years, avoiding making a direct payment to the Trump administration.
In exchange, the federal government would restore Brown's funding — the government had put
The schools agreed to other changes
Columbia agreed to implement an outside monitor to oversee whether it was complying with the changes it had promised the government, such as to reform disciplinary measures for student protesters and remove diversity-related policies.
Brown said it would not perform gender-affirming surgeries on minors — which Brown's medical school has never done — or prescribe puberty blockers. It adopted the Trump administration's definitions of 'male' and 'female,' sparking outrage among current and former students who say that change harms transgender and nonbinary students who are excluded from those definitions.
The two schools also took different approaches to addressing antisemitism: Columbia's measures included adopting a controversial definition of antisemitism and
a review of its programs related to the Middle East. Brown, meanwhile, said it would commit resources to support programs related to Jewish students, as well as conduct a campus climate survey in 2025 that would include information about the climate for Jewish students on campus.
Both schools also said they would share admissions data about applicants' standardized test scores and grade point averages, as well as demographic data such as their race. On Thursday, the administration made that a
Advertisement
Neither agreement, however, appeared to place any restrictions on what or how the school teaches,
avoiding infringement on academic freedom many critics of the Trump administration had feared.
The schools negotiated under different circumstances
Many critics of Trump's war on higher education viewed Brown's agreement to invest in local education as more aligned with its mission as a university, rather than simply paying a fine for the government to use as it sees fit. Some have also voiced concerns the implementation of an outside monitor at Columbia could allow the federal government to infringe on its independence, despite the deal they had reached.
The arrangements reflect differences in the amount of pressure the administration had applied to each school, down to the number of pages in the deal — Columbia's deal was 22 pages long, while Brown's was nine.
Columbia had seen among the most high-profile protests against the war in Gaza and was the first institution to face government sanctions, beginning in March with the cancellation of more than $400 million in funding. The federal government has since found it in violation of civil rights law for allegedly acting with 'deliberate indifference' to harassment of Jewish students.
The administration's investigation into Brown's alleged civil rights violations, however, was ongoing at the time the deal was struck.
What the Trump deals could mean for Harvard
The Trump administration has quickly touted each agreement as a victory. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon called the Columbia settlement a 'roadmap for elite universities' and President Trump declared on Truth Social 'woke is officially DEAD at Brown' after announcing that deal.
Advertisement
Still, some worry any agreement with the administration only opens the door to further coercion if the federal government finds something else it doesn't like at any of the schools it is dealing with.
Trump and his allies have long seen Harvard, the nation's wealthiest university, as its best opportunity to influence higher education and have aimed to force an agreement by canceling more than $3 billion in funding, threatening international students' statuses, and levying a number of civil rights complaints against the school.
In response, the school has put up the most forceful legal and public relations fight against the federal government, meaning any agreement it reaches could reverberate further than that of its peers.
The government is 'getting whatever they can get so they can make the announcement — it's all about the noise, it's not about the substance in any way," said Jonathan Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations at the American Council on Education, which represents 1,600 universities.
'If they reach a settlement with Harvard, they will do just what they did in the other cases: Make a big, splashy, noisy thing about it and not even refer to the actual details of what they've done. ... It's just generating news cycles, that's all they care about.'
Anjali Huynh can be reached at
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

European leaders rally behind Ukraine ahead of Trump-Putin meeting
European leaders rally behind Ukraine ahead of Trump-Putin meeting

Chicago Tribune

time20 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

European leaders rally behind Ukraine ahead of Trump-Putin meeting

KYIV, Ukraine — European nations have rallied behind Ukraine, saying peace in the war-torn nation can't be resolved without Kyiv, ahead of an upcoming meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Trump said next Friday's meeting with his Russian counterpart on U.S. soil would focus on ending the war, now in its fourth year. In response, Zelenskyy thanked European allies in a post on X, writing Sunday: 'The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people.' Saturday's statement by top European leaders came after the White House confirmed the U.S president was willing to grant Putin the one-on-one meeting Russia has long pushed for, and suggestions from Trump that a peace deal could include 'some swapping of territories.' That raised fears that Kyiv may be pressured into giving up land or accepting other curbs on its sovereignty. A White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity as they aren't allowed to speak publicly, told The Associated Press that Trump remained open to a trilateral summit with both the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, but for now, he will have a bilateral meeting requested by Putin. Meanwhile, U.S. Vice President JD Vance met Saturday with top European and Ukrainian officials at the British Foreign Secretary's weekend residence to discuss how to end the war. Trump previously said he would meet with Putin regardless of whether the Russian leader agreed to meet with Zelenskyy. The Trump-Putin meeting may prove pivotal in a war that began when Russia invaded its western neighbor and has led to tens of thousands of deaths, although there's no guarantee it will stop the fighting since Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart on their conditions for peace. Saturday's statement, signed by the president of the European Union and leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland and the UK, stressed the need for a 'just and lasting peace' for Kyiv, including 'robust and credible' security guarantees. 'Ukraine has the freedom of choice over its own destiny. Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities,' the statement said. 'The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine. We remain committed to the principle that international borders must not be changed by force,' the Europeans added. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told NBC's 'Meet the Press' on Sunday that a good deal would mean preventing an emboldened Russia, and aggressors elsewhere, from trying to once again redraw borders by force. A Trump ally and Russia hawk, Graham nevertheless said that 'you can't end a war without talking.' 'I do hope that Zelenskyy can be part of the process. I have every confidence in the world that (President Trump) is going to go to meet Putin from a position of strength, that he's going to look out for Europe and Ukrainian needs to end this war honorably,' he said. He argued that 'Ukraine is not going to evict every Russian' soldier, but said the West should give Kyiv robust security guarantees, keep some of its forces on the ground 'as trip wires,' and keep arming Ukraine 'so that Russia will be deterred by the most lethal army on the continent of Europe.' A monthlong U.S.-led push to achieve a truce in Ukraine has so far proved fruitless, with Kyiv agreeing in principle while the Kremlin has held out for terms more to its liking. Trump also moved up an ultimatum to impose additional sanctions on Russia and introduce secondary tariffs targeting countries that buy Russian oil if the Kremlin did not move toward a settlement. The deadline was Friday. The White House did not answer questions Saturday about possible sanctions. The Kremlin earlier this week reiterated demands that Ukraine give up territory, abandon its bid to join NATO, and accept limits on its military, in exchange for a withdrawal of Russian troops from the rest of the country. Particularly galling for Kyiv is Moscow's insistence that it cede pockets of eastern and southern Ukraine the Kremlin claims to have annexed, despite lacking full military control. Mark Galeotti, a British expert in Russian politics who heads the Mayak Intelligence consultancy, says Moscow's tactic of encircling towns in eastern Ukraine has brought a string of territorial gains for Russia, and Putin 'does not appear to feel under pressure.' For the Kremlin, 'further delaying any more serious U.S. action and the optics of a meeting with the U.S. president will already be wins,' Galeotti argued in an analysis published Sunday by the UK's Sunday Times newspaper. Zelenskyy said Saturday that Ukraine 'will not give Russia any awards for what it has done' and that 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.' Ukrainian officials previously told the AP privately that Kyiv would be amenable to a peace deal that would de facto recognize Ukraine's inability to regain lost territories militarily. But Zelenskyy on Saturday insisted that formally ceding land was out of the question. Galeotti argued that any deal that involves Ukraine abandoning territory would be 'agonising' and politically dangerous for Zelenskyy. Andriy Yermak, a top aide to Zelenskyy, noted on Sunday that Kyiv will strive to boost its position ahead of the planned Trump-Putin meeting. 'Ahead lies an important week of diplomacy,' he said. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Sunday that European leaders are 'intensively preparing' ahead of the Alaska summit, while they 'hope and expect' that Zelenskyy will be invited. Merz told Germany's public broadcaster ARD that he has for weeks been encouraging Washington to toughen sanctions against Russia, adding that 'Putin only acts under pressure.' Mikhail Kasyanov, Putin's first prime minister and later a political opponent, similarly told the BBC Sunday that the Kremlin would be more willing to negotiate seriously and make some concessions when sanctions have further strained Russia's economy. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Sunday praised Washington for taking steps such as allowing more military equipment to flow to Ukraine and imposing secondary sanctions on India for purchasing Russian oil, saying Trump 'clearly is putting pressure on Putin.' 'Next Friday will be important because it will be about testing Putin — how serious he is — on bringing this terrible war to an end,' Rutte said in an interview with ABC's 'This Week.'

The Sorry Sugar Status Quo
The Sorry Sugar Status Quo

Wall Street Journal

time22 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

The Sorry Sugar Status Quo

Regarding 'Trump, Coke and the Sugar Cartel' (Opinion, July 24): In 1988, while working at the Commerce Department as an entry-level economist, I co-authored the study 'United States Sugar Policy: An Analysis.' It demonstrated the detrimental effect on U.S. consumers of an unholy alliance between the high fructose corn industry and a small group of sugar growers, primarily in Florida, who received an average subsidy of roughly $260,000 per farm. Nearly 40 years later, nothing appears to have changed. If the president wants to demonstrate true courage, he would abolish the sugar tariff-quota regime and let the free market reign. My guess is that we'll sooner see pigs fly.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store