Trump-Harvard clash heats up. Here's what to know.
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's feud with Harvard University has reached a fever pitch – and it's only getting more heated.
Days after he attempted to ban the Ivy League school from enrolling international students – a move that a federal judge immediately blocked – the General Services Administration directed all federal agencies on May 27 to explore ways to cut remaining contracts with the university, according to a senior administration official.
The order is the latest in a series of direct swipes the White House has taken in recent weeks with the aim of punishing the Harvard community. The feud has escalated on a near-daily basis, halting major research trials, freezing billions of dollars in federal funding and prompting multiple high-stakes lawsuits.
Trump's motives for targeting Harvard are complicated. He and members of his administration have roundly criticized the school and its Jewish president for creating a campus environment that the White House has characterized as rife with antisemitism, since protests broke out in response to the Israel-Hamas war.
However, the Ivy League institution has long been a punching bag for conservatives, many of whom view it as a ground zero for liberal ideology and activism. More recently, Trump has complained in an increasingly forceful way about Harvard enrolling too many students from other countries.
Read more: A new phase begins in Trump's battle with higher education
Here's where things stand in Trump's crusade against Harvard.
Harvard's foreign students spent the final days of their spring semester mired in fear and uncertainty.
The Trump administration told them a week ago they'd need to transfer to another institution or risk losing their ability to remain in the United States. The only thing keeping that threat at bay is a federal court order.
On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's certification to participate in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, functionally barring the university from enrolling any international students. The change went into effect immediately, just a week before many foreign students would graduate, leaving them scrambling to determine whether their degrees would be jeopardized.
Read more: International college students bring billions to the US. Here's why that may change.
Harvard sued the following morning, accusing federal officials of violating multiple laws. Hours after the university filed its lawsuit, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a temporary restraining order.
The president also ordered Harvard on May 25 to turn over the "names and countries" of every international student enrolled at the university. The federal government already has access to that information through a database called the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System.
Read more: Trump has been defunding university research. Does China benefit from it?
The other major front in the Trump administration's battle with Harvard is over federal funding. Since mid-April, the White House has frozen billions of dollars in federal research grants for the school while characterizing the punitive actions as a response to Trump's concerns about campus antisemitism.
Pausing that money has upended the university's research apparatus. Nearly every direct federal grant for Harvard's school of public health was terminated in May, according to the university. Among the dozens of defunded research projects were studies related to cancer screenings and lung disease.
The first major threat to Harvard's funding came on March 31, when a task force of multiple federal agencies announced a review of roughly $9 billion in contracts and grants to the school. Harvard's leaders refused to comply with what they saw as a list of unprecedented demands by the task force to overhaul hiring and teaching. In response, the Trump administration froze $2.2 billion of the school's federal funding on April 14. Despite multiple requests, the administration still has not clarified to USA TODAY how that money breaks down.
The university filed an initial suit against the White House on April 21 to restore its federal funding.
In the weeks since, federal agencies have deemed Harvard ineligible for new federal research grants, yanked an additional $450 million in funding and considered cutting off even more government support for the school.
In an interview with NPR on May 27, Harvard's president, Alan Garber, said his university isn't the only one whose scholars' scientific research has been hamstrung.
"Everybody benefits from the research work of universities like ours. And it is not only about Harvard," he said. "The kinds of changes that the administration has begun and is contemplating, which include deep cuts to the National Institutes of Health and to the National Science Foundation, will affect all research universities and will have a real impact on the ability of the United States to remain at the forefront of science and technology."
On May 2, Trump said the Internal Revenue Service was "going to be taking away" Harvard's tax-exempt status. That unprecedented threat has become a major area of concern for the school and a point of contention in one of its lawsuits against the White House.
Unless a judge deems the effort unlawful, the university could lose hundreds of millions of dollars, according to some estimates.
Typically, there's an apolitical process the IRS follows to strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status. The executive branch is prohibited, by federal law, from influencing IRS audits and investigations.
"There is no legal basis to rescind Harvard's tax-exempt status," Harvard spokesman Jason Newton said in a statement on May 2. 'Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission."
While many of Harvard's students and faculty are on break this summer, the school's lawyers will still be battling the White House in court.
The next major court hearing is set for May 29, when a judge will consider extending her hold on Trump's attempt to ban Harvard from enrolling foreign students.
Court proceedings in Harvard's other lawsuit, challenging the funding freezes and review of its tax-exempt status, are scheduled throughout June. The judge in that case is the same. She was appointed by President Barack Obama.
Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump-Harvard clash heats up. Here's what to know.
Hashtags

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


Politico
19 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump revokes California's nation-leading electric vehicle mandate
President Donald Trump moved Thursday to eliminate California's nation-leading vehicle emissions standards, upending strict rules that had become a template for states across the nation to realize their greenhouse gas ambitions. Trump signed three Congressional Review Act resolutions rolling back a trio of California's rules at a White House signing ceremony, delivering on his Day 1 executive order to quickly roll back electric vehicle mandates around the country. 'We officially rescue the US auto industry from destruction by terminating California's electric vehicle mandate, once and for all,' Trump said at a Oval Office signing alongside House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. The president, in a wide-ranging speech before the signing, used the moment to hit on a range of issues, including inflation, his disdain for windmills and his recent fallout with Tesla CEO Elon Musk. 'Now we know why Elon doesn't like me so much,' Trump quipped, before saying that Musk never asked him to save EV rules and that their break was over other 'smaller things.' While the Trump administration has also gone on the offensive against federal vehicle standards, California's regulations aimed at phasing out gas-powered passenger vehicles and heavy-duty diesel trucks — which are followed by a dozen other states — have drawn the stiffest opposition from the auto and fossil fuel industries. 'Worse than unachievable, these EV mandates were going to be harmful,' said John Bozzella, president and CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. 'Harmful to auto affordability, to consumer choice, to industry competitiveness and to economic activity.' The move takes place against the backdrop of worsening relations between Trump and Gov, Gavin Newsom, with the president ordering the military to quell unrest in Los Angeles over immigration raids. It also comes as Tesla CEO and former White House adviser Elon Musk clashed with Trump last week over electric vehicle policies. Trump's signature revokes the Golden State's unique permission to exceed federal vehicle pollution standards, which it's used for decades to set nation-leading rules. A dozen other Democrat-led states have opted to follow California's rules, representing one-third of the U.S. auto market. California's regulations aim to require automakers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission vehicles, culminating in a 2035 target of all new-car sales being electric or otherwise carbon-free. Trump had targeted California's rules in his first term and on the campaign trail for his second term. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin asked Congress to revoke them using the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn rules passed in the waning days of the previous administration. The request triggered a debate among Republicans about whether to stretch congressional norms by using the CRA to roll back California's rules, which Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough and the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office have said aren't subject to the law. In addition to the rules for passenger vehicles, Thursday's signings roll back California's authority to enforce zero-emission sales targets for commercial trucks and higher standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. The fight over whether Congress acted lawfully will now head to the courts. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta said last month they would sue immediately after Trump signs the resolutions. The outcome of that court case will have widespread implications, as Democratic leaders seek to wean drivers and industry off fossil fuels and hit lofty greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. But the question is especially acute for California, which has struggled for decades to reduce the nation's worst smog in the Los Angeles area and Central Valley and comply with federal air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. Failure to reach those standards could result in sanctions and withholding of federal highway funds, which both Republican and Democratic administrations have floated in the past. Trump's EPA threatened sanctions against the state in 2019, just days after the agency revoked an earlier version of its electric vehicle rules. 'It is hard to imagine that they will not threaten sanctions,' said Ann Carlson, who was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under former President Joe Biden. 'The president clearly has it out for California, and Los Angeles is obviously in his sights.' EPA said in a statement when asked about the possibility of sanctions that it will enforce the Clean Air Act. 'EPA will continue to implement the Clean Air Act as provided in law and will continue to hope that California can get into attainment after decades of nonattainment,' the agency said. EPA could develop its own plan for California to meet federal standards, though air quality experts say that's unlikely because the agency would have to take unpopular steps like restricting driving. California Air Resources Board spokesperson Lindsay Buckley said in a statement that without the waivers, the state will need to find an alternative to reach compliance. CARB chair Liane Randolph told state lawmakers during a hearing last month that she's 'confident California will prevail in litigation,' but that could take years, during which the rules are not enforceable. Randolph suggested that the state could consider approaches like district emissions rules for 'indirect sources' like warehouses that attract commercial trucks, incentives to encourage EV purchases and putting more funding towards public transit.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
People Are Absolutely Dragging JD Vance For His "Cringe" Tweet About "Les Mis"
Vice President JD Vance and his wife, Usha Vance, joined President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump for a performance of Les Misérables at the Kennedy Center on Wednesday evening. Many found it ironic, given that the musical is about an uprising against abusive authority figures. But just before the show, Vance wanted to make it very clear he had no idea what it was about. The vice president posted: @JDVance / Via In a follow-up tweet, the vice president added: 'That's apparently a different thing called Sweeney Todd.' @JDVance / Via Twitter: @JDVance Given that Les Misérables is one of the most enduring and widely performed modern musicals ― and that it's based on what's considered one of the most important novels of the 19th century ― not many people are buying Vance's ignorance. And they let him know on X: @DSAOrangeCounty / Via @SonnyBunch / Via @alex_shephard / Via Related: The Internet Is Having A Field Day Over Marjorie Taylor Greene's Tweet About Homeschooling With An Altered Map @CanadianKobzar / Via @Biedersam / Via @realStevenWalk / Via @AttalAurelia / Via Related: A NSFW Float Depicting Donald Trump's "MAGA" Penis Was Just Paraded Around Germany, And It' LauraBedrossian / Via @Richard_Vixen / Via @jaredlipof / Via @taylorttt / Via @dwaldenwrites / Via @StatisticUrban / Via @mccue / Via @Letterb0xed / Via @The_Wireman / Via This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: JD Vance Shared The Most Bizarre Tweet Of Him Serving "Food" As Donald Trump's Housewife Also in In the News: This Senator's Clap Back Fully Gagged An MSNBC Anchor, And The Clip Is Going Viral Also in In the News: AOC's Viral Response About A Potential Presidential Run Has Everyone Watching, And I'm Honestly Living For It
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Britain ready to implement US tariff deal, trade minister says
LONDON (Reuters) -Britain is ready to implement its side of a tariff deal with the United States and is hopeful for a proclamation from U.S. President Donald Trump to put the agreement into effect in the coming days, trade minister Jonathan Reynolds said on Thursday. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Trump on May 8 agreed to reduce tariffs on UK imports of cars and steel to the U.S., with Britain agreeing to lower tariffs on beef and ethanol, but implementation of the deal has been delayed. Reynolds met U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Tuesday and discussed the implementation of the deal. Asked on Thursday if there would be an update by the end of the week, Reynolds said he was "very hopeful". "We're ready to go, and as soon as the president and the White House are ready to go on their side, we'll implement (our) part of the deal," Reynolds told reporters. Reynolds said he would issue a government order known as a statutory instrument to implement the changes to reciprocal tariffs. Officials said that the update on implementation was likely to come early next week. One of the details to be ironed out before the deal can be implemented is steel quotas. Reynolds added that he wanted to make sure the tariff reductions applied to every bit of the UK steel industry, as the U.S. finalises quotas that will place supply chain requirements on British steel exports to the United States. The bioethanol industry has warned its future is under threat, with Associated British Foods deciding on the fate of a plant later this month. Reynolds acknowledged the deal could increase competition but said the industry was already struggling. "We are very sensitive to the ethanol issue... (but) they're losing a lot of money already," Reynolds said, adding regulatory tweaks could help, but that for financial support: "any intervention I make has to be a clear route to profitability." "So there are much wider issues for these partners than just the U.S. trade deal." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data