Education Department launches foreign funding probe into UC Berkeley
The department said the school may have violated Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, alleging that documents submitted to the department on the school's behalf were 'incomplete or inaccurate,' according to a Friday release.
Higher education institutions receiving federal financial assistance are required to disclose foreign source gifts and contracts with a value of $250,000 or more annually to the Education Department.
In May 2023, the Daily Beast reported that UC Berkeley received $220 million from the Chinese government to launch a joint venture with the Tsinghua-Berkeley Shenzhen Institute.
The department acknowledged the probe was sparked by media reports alleging the institution accepted hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from a foreign government, but it did not specify from which outlet, article or country the information originated.
In 2023, UC Berkeley then acknowledged having failed to report millions of dollars in foreign government funding, as required by Section 117, according to the department's release.
The claims were followed by a 2024 report from Republicans on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party alleging that the school's research was contributing to China's military advancement, which resulted in a dissolved partnership between Berkeley and their counterparts overseas, according to The Associated Press.
'The Biden-Harris Administration turned a blind eye to colleges and universities' legal obligations by deprioritizing oversight and allowing foreign gifts to pour onto American campuses. Despite widespread compliance failures, no new Section 117 investigations were initiated for four years, and ongoing investigations were closed prematurely,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement.
'I have great confidence in my Office of General Counsel to investigate these matters fully, and they will begin by thoroughly examining UC Berkeley's apparent failure to fully and accurately disclose significant funding received from foreign sources,' she added.
UC Berkeley has denied claims of wrongdoing.
'Over the course of the last two years, UC Berkeley has been cooperating with federal inquiries regarding 117 reporting issues, and we will continue to do so,' the school said in a statement obtained by The Hill.
The Trump administration's decision to crack down on UC Berkeley comes after the government rescinded federal funding from Columbia University and Harvard University over their failure to meet McMahon's demands for a complete overhaul of campus structure.
Columbia acquiesced to the orders, but Harvard has gained widespread attention for challenging the administration in court.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Engadget
19 minutes ago
- Engadget
Court blocks FTC investigation into Media Matters' alleged scheme against X
The court has blocked the Federal Trade Commission's investigation into Media Matters, the media nonprofit that previously published research showing that ads appeared on X alongside neo-Nazi and other antisemitic content. In 2023, Elon Musk's X filed a lawsuit against the media watchdog following an advertiser exodus. It accused Media Matters of "knowingly and maliciously manufactur[ing] side-by-side images depicting advertisers' posts on X Corp.'s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white national fringe content." Just this May, the FTC started looking into whether the nonprofit violated antitrust laws by allegedly colluding with advertising and advocacy groups to boycott X. In June, Media Matters sued the FTC, accusing it of unfairly targeting the group in retaliation for past criticisms of X. "The Federal Trade Commission seeks to punish Media Matters for its journalism and speech in exposing matters of substantial public concern — including how has enabled and profited from extremist content that proliferated after Elon Musk took over the platform formerly known as Twitter," the group said at the time. Now, Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan has granted a preliminary injunction in the nonprofit's favor. Sooknanan has agreed with the group that the FTC's investigation is "a retaliatory act" and has noted that it is "likely to succeed on its First Amendment retaliation claim." She wrote in her decision that such probes would deter other reporters from speaking again. "Indeed, the FTC's [investigation] has had its intended effect." Apparently, because of the probe, Media Matters has "decided against pursuing certain stories about the FTC, Chairman Ferguson, and Mr. Musk." "The court's ruling demonstrates the importance of fighting over folding, which far too many are doing when confronted with intimidation from the Trump administration," Angelo Carusone, the president of Media Matters, told The New York Times . "We will continue to stand up and fight for the First Amendment rights that protect every American." As the publication notes, courts had also blocked investigations into the group by the attorneys general in Texas and Missouri. Musk's lawsuits against the nonprofit, however, are still ongoing.
The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
‘South Park' mocks Trump all the way to the bank
President Trump's newest high-profile foil is 'South Park,' the long-running animated show that has been packing episode after episode with raunchy and sometimes violent jokes about the president and members of his Cabinet. The mockery has been no-holds-barred and has included depictions of Trump in bed with Satan, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem shooting cute cartoon dogs, and Dora the Explorer giving a massage at Mar-a-Lago, Trump's resort Florida. It has not gone unnoticed. The Trump administration, seemingly in no joking mood, has issued angry statements attacking the show's creators and dismissing 'South Park' as irrelevant and out of touch. Entertainment business and political observers, however, say the fight may be breathing new life into the politically incorrect satire program and providing the comedians behind it with more fodder for their weekly shows than ever. 'This in some ways feels like two rival TV shows fighting with one another,' said Matt Sienkiewicz, chair of the Boston College Communication Department and an expert on pop culture and comedy. ''South Park' is trying to do their old school style of critique of the government, and this government has gotten so cartoonish, the back-and-forth is what makes this so significant.' The attacks on Trump also appear to have been good for ratings. The show's Season 27 premiere in late July earned Comedy Central its highest-rated episode since the late 1990s while social media platforms have been filled with clips from Season 27 in recent weeks. The White House this week declined to comment on the show's sustained attacks, but a West Wing official sought to dismiss the show's relevance after its season premiere late last month mocked Trump. 'The Left's hypocrisy truly has no end — for years they have come after 'South Park' for what they labeled as 'offense' content, but suddenly they are praising the show,' a White House spokesperson told Variety at the time. 'Just like the creators of 'South Park,' the Left has no authentic or original content, which is why their popularity continues to hit record lows.' Last week, Noem tore into the show after it portrayed her face melting off due to heavy makeup. 'It's so lazy to just constantly make fun of women for how they look. Only the liberals and the extremists do that,' Noem said. The show's creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, responded this week by publishing an alternate ending to last week's episode on social media, showing Noem walking into a pet store and killing dogs inside with a gun. Noem received criticism last year after she revealed in a book she put a family pet down after a hunting trip. Jim Mendrinos, a comedy writer and a producer at Gotham Writers Workshop in New York, suggested the Trump administration, by responding so forcefully, is handing Parker and Stone a gift. 'This administration has no sense of humor,' Mendrinos said. 'And any good comic knows if you're under somebody's skin, you're gonna burrow in. That's the essence of roast comedy and that's what they're doing here.' To be certain, 'South Park,' has a long history of mocking prominent politicians and figures on the left, from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to former President Obama. The program has sparked controversy and backlash from progressives on multiple occasions during its more than two-decade history on the air for its satirical representations of religious figures, extensive use of racist language and ribbing of climate change activists. But the recent tension with the president and leading MAGA figures comes at a unique moment both in national politics and the business of entertainment. Earlier this year, Parker and Stone signed a five-year streaming deal with Hollywood giant Paramount, which owns Comedy Central, worth more than $1 billion. Paramount is facing increased scrutiny over its relationship with the president's administration after promising to change CBS's editorial direction and canceling 'Late Night,' the show hosted by Stephen Colbert, a frequent Trump critic. With its season premiere last month, 'South Park' called out Paramount over a $16 million payment the company made to the president's foundation to settle a lawsuit against CBS News, a deal that was seen by many as a capitulation to the administration made in order to secure its recent merger with Skydance. 'Matt and Trey are incredibly talented,' Paramount's newly appointed CEO David Ellison told CNN after the episode mocking his company aired. 'They are equal opportunity offenders and always have been.' Ellison's tolerance for Stone and Parker's attacks on Trump and even his own company could have something to do with the show's newfound popularity. Longtime observers of 'South Park' noted the program has always carried a modest but dedicated following, fading from the public discourse during President Biden's administration. Some attribute this to a decline in linear cable viewership, the creation of more animated comedy shows on other networks and what some regard as a slower churn of political news over the last four years. But with Trump's return to the White House, 'South Park' has seen a ratings boom. 'This whole thing has brought the spotlight back to 'South Park' in a way it hasn't enjoyed in a really long time,' Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock, a researcher and editor who authored a book on the show's impact on American pop culture. 'It seems there is a lot of dissatisfaction on the left with some institutions, including the news media, sort of soft-balling Trump and here's 'South Park' taking off the gloves.' How long the fight between 'South Park' and Trump World lasts remains to be seen, but in the short term most observers agree Parker and Stone's mission to take aim at the president is paying off in a big way. ''South Park' has always been able to do things its own way by being light on its feet and the way they've worked their contracts,' Sienkiewicz said. 'There's a lot of freedom in the financial success they've had, and they seem to pick and choose their battles carefully. There are very few others in the entertainment space that can operate like they have.'
USA Today
19 minutes ago
- USA Today
Notice a theme to Trump's planned takeovers of cities? These Black mayors do.
President Trump has warned he might send the National Guard to other cities. The Black mayors of those cities vow to push back. OAKLAND, California ‒ Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee and other officials in this California city are treating President Donald Trump's warning that he might send the National Guard there as more than just an offhand comment. They're bracing for a fight. Lee and other Black mayors, along with civil rights activists and lawmakers across the country are increasingly concerned about Trump singling out cities like Oakland, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Baltimore and Washington, DC. All of them are led by Black mayors and all of those leaders are Democrats. 'We just can't help but feel in some kind of way that we're being specifically profiled," said Van R. Johnson, president of the African American Mayors Association and mayor of Savannah, Georgia. 'That's not right. That's not fair. We want our federal government to work with us. We're just a phone call away.' New York Rep. Yvette Clarke, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, called Trump's takeover of DC's policing a 'blatantly racist and despicable power grab.' 'It won't stop in Washington, DC," she said in a statement. 'The stakes are high not just for Washington, DC, but for the future of democracy in every corner of this country.' Trump used his presidential powers in early August to take over policing in Washington, DC, complaining crime is rampant and officials haven't done enough to address it ‒ despite statistics showing crime in the district is at a 30-year-low. Trump also threatened to deploy the National Guard to help fight crime in other communities. "We're going to take back our capital," Trump said Aug. 11. "And then we'll look at other cities also." He called it a "historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse." Different visions for tackling urban problems White House officials argue the nation's capital is filthy and that Trump has seen that firsthand. In March, Trump signed an executive order titled "Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful," which sets up a task force of federal officials to clean up the city. 'If Democrats had any common sense, they would follow President Trump's lead to crack down on violent crime that has plagued our nation's capital – and Democrat-run cities across the country," Taylor Rogers, White House assistant press secretary, said in an email to USA TODAY. "Instead of criticizing President Trump's popular, tough-on crime policies, they should focus on cleaning up their own cities which are some of the most dangerous places in America." Many big cities are run by Democrats, but both violent and property crimes have fallen nationwide in recent years, federal data shows. Civil rights leaders criticized Trump for portraying cities, especially those led by Black mayors, as crime ridden. "Painting a false picture of the city's largest Black-majority cities, led by Black mayors, is part of the Trump administration's ongoing strategy to exploit racial distrust for political gain,'' Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, and George Lambert, president of the Greater Washington Urban League President, said in a statement. If Trump really wanted to help cities, several mayors argued, he wouldn't be cutting funding for anti-poverty programs and community policing efforts. 'We need to have this federal government invest in cities like Oakland instead of disinvesting in us,' said Lee, who spent 27 years in Congress, including during Trump's first term. 'It doesn't make any sense what this government is doing if they want to see cities not just survive but thrive.' More: 'DC has a right to govern itself': Civil rights leaders denounce Trump's takeover move 'Reasonable people can look at the optics' Trump has yet to publicly bring up race in his criticisms of those cities, but experts point to his history of racially disparaging remarks, including during his first term when he questioned why the United States would let in people from countries like Haiti and parts of Africa, which he referred to using an expletive. Trump also called Baltimore, a predominately Black city, a 'disgusting, rat and rodent-infested mess.' While the president didn't specifically mention race then or in his recent references, it's clearly implied, said Jason Williams, a professor of Justice Studies at Montclair State University in New Jersey. Williams said urban centers historically have been code for talking about Black people or communities of color. 'He doesn't necessarily have to say it in order for his base to know what the implications are,' said Williams, adding that most people know DC has a significant Black population. 'It does give him some plausible deniability. Not that I think this president would care." Oakland's Lee told USA TODAY she finds Trump's actions "fearmongering and diversionary." "A lot of what he does is to provoke unrest and that gives him an excuse, so we have to be prepared and ready to fight," she said. Oakland has a contingency plan if Trump tries to send in National Guard, Lee added. When asked if she could provide any details, the mayor replied, 'I'm not at liberty to do that right now. That would be inappropriate at this point.' In DC, Trump justified his actions by citing a recent overnight assault of a former federal official and in Los Angeles, he called in the National Guard to quell civil protests spurred by the aggressive immigration crackdown. He might take advantage of other isolated incidents to target other big cities, said Insha Rahman, vice president of advocacy at the Vera Institute of Justice, a nonprofit organization focused on criminal justice. "It's the red meat that Trump uses to rile up the MAGA base and it is effective as bait only when it's left unchecked," Rahman said. 'We've been here before' Federal officials have sometimes used their powers to undermine Black urban leadership and portray them as chaotic and incompetent or crime prone, Williams said. He pointed to examples such as the urban renewal of the 1960s and 1970s when federal officials displaced Black neighborhoods with highways and a century earlier, after Reconstruction, when governments dismantled post-Civil War gains. 'We've been here before with federal overreach and an attempt to try to roll back hard-won wins," Williams said. The nation's capital has long been in the crosshairs of Trump and GOP congressional leaders. Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers threatened to withhold funds if Bowser didn't remove a Black Lives Matter mural from a street near the White House. 'DC has always been this sort of political football for the Republicans,' Williams said. While some Black mayors are concerned about their cities becoming a Trump target, they're continuing their work to combat crime, Johnson, the Savannah mayor, said. 'We're worried about fighting our federal government as well as fighting crime," he said. 'It's a continuous 'what if, what next,' which we think are distractions from what the American people are really talking about.' Johnson said the ideologies and approaches of some Black mayors may be different than Trump's, but that doesn't mean they can't be partners on issues, including crime. 'We understand elections. We're politicians ourselves," he said. 'We're charged with playing with whoever is on the field. When Donald Trump became president, he became president of our cities too.' Contributing: Phillip Bailey
