Fact Check: Clarifying claims surrounding Harvard's free Constitution course
Claim:
Harvard University will offer a free online course for every U.S. citizen covering basic U.S. government, understanding the Constitution and "How to Recognize a Dictatorship Takeover 101."
Rating:
What's True:
Harvard University offers a free online course called "American Government: Constitutional Foundations" via its edX program. The course is free not just to U.S. citizens but to anyone in the world. A new session was due to start on May 27, 2025, though the course has been around since at least 2018, according to the course instructor.
What's False:
While the course covers the basics of how the U.S. government and the Constitution work, there is no evidence of a section within in covering "How to Recognize a Dictatorship Takeover 101."
Around May 24, 2025, a claim (archived) started circulating that Harvard University would offer a free online course for every U.S. citizen covering basic U.S. government, understanding the Constitution and "How to Recognize a Dictatorship Takeover 101."
Harvard University set to launch FREE college courses online for every US Citizen. Highlighting basic U.S. government, understanding the Constitution, and How to recognize a Dictatorship takeover 101. Harvard University.
— Brad (@BraddrofliT) May 24, 2025
A popular early version of the claim posted on X read: "Harvard University set to launch FREE college courses online for every US Citizen. Highlighting basic U.S. government, understanding the Constitution, and How to recognize a Dictatorship takeover 101. Harvard University."
The claim also circulated on Facebook (archived), Threads (archived), Instagram (archived), Reddit (archived), Bluesky (archived) and TikTok (archived) with similar text. Snopes readers emailed to ask if the claim was true.
Harvard does offer a free online course called "American Government: Constitutional Foundations." The course, according to Harvard University's website, "explores the origins of U.S. political culture, how that culture informed the Constitution, and how that framework continues to influence the country's politics and policies."
Harvard delivers the course through edX, a platform that hosts free college-level courses from universities including Harvard. The courses are free not just for U.S. citizens but for people around the world.
However, though a new session was due to start on May 27, Thomas E. Patterson, the course's instructor, said via email the course launched "pre-COVID," meaning before the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. Harvard and Patterson last updated the course in 2024, he added. Sarah Kennedy-O'Reilly, assistant director at Harvard Public Affairs & Communications, said via email that edX launched in 2012. She added that: "These courses take roughly 12 – 18 months to build online so none have been created in response to recent events." Additionally, we found no evidence of a section within the course on "How to Recognize a Dictatorship Takeover 101." Therefore, we rate this claim mostly true.
The claim circulated as Harvard University made headlines over its ongoing conflict with the Trump administration. Harvard twice filed lawsuits against the Trump administration — first in April and again in May 2025, after the administration sought to strip the university of its right to admit international students.
In early May 2025, U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced that Harvard would no longer receive federal grants, accusing the university of engaging in "a systemic pattern of violating federal law."
Later that month, a federal judge temporarily blocked the administration's attempt to stop Harvard from enrolling international students. Harvard's lawsuit remained pending.
According to Harvard University's website, "American Government: Constitutional Foundations" covered the origins of U.S. political culture, the Constitution's provisions for limited government, limits to popular influence, the division of power between the federal and state governments, the individual rights held by today's Americans, the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, the 1964 Civil Rights Act and affirmative action.
Patterson said the course was "not about a particular administration but rather constitutional design with contemporary and historical examples."
American Government: Constitutional Foundations | Harvard University. 9 July 2018, https://pll.harvard.edu/course/american-government-constitutional-foundations.
BINKLEY, COLLIN. "Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration from barring Foreign Student Enrollment at Harvard." AP News, 23 May 2025, https://apnews.com/article/harvard-foreign-students-enrollment-trump-lawsuit-94b65866c563e67a7a7a3c79e90144d6.
Burga, Solcyré. "Breaking Down the Harvard vs. Trump Timeline." TIME, 6 May 2025, https://time.com/7283245/harvard-trump-funding-timeline/.
"Can Anyone Use edX?" edX Learner Help Center, https://help.edx.org/edxlearner/s/article/Can-anyone-use-edX?language=en_US#:~:text=Can%20anyone%20use%20edX%3F,-Answer&text=edX%20courses%20are%20open%20to,undergraduate%20college%20or%20masters%20level. Accessed 27 May 2025.
EDSecMcMahon. "Dear @Harvard :" X, 5 May 2025, https://x.com/EDSecMcMahon/status/1919517481313427594.
edX. "HarvardX: American Government: Constitutional Foundations." edX, 27 May 2025, https://archive.ph/eSk1v.
Powell, Alvin. "Harvard Files Lawsuit against Trump Administration." Harvard Gazette, 22 Apr. 2025, https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/04/harvard-files-lawsuit-against-trump-administration/.
---. "University Sues Administration over Move to Bar International Students, Scholars." Harvard Gazette, 23 May 2025, https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/05/university-sues-administration-over-move-to-bar-international-students-scholars/.
Rose, Andy. "Attacks on Harvard by Trump Administration Have Built for Months. A Timeline of the Dispute." CNN, 26 Apr. 2025, https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/26/us/harvard-university-trump-timeline.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump admin. cancels Moderna bird fu vaccine contract
The Trump administration has canceled a contract with Moderna (MRNA) worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The contract was supposed to help Moderna develop a vaccine for humans to defend against bird flu. Yahoo Finance Senior Health Care Reporter Anjalee Khemlani reports the details in the video above. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime here. Trump administration canceling more than $700 million awarded to drug maker Moderna to develop the vaccine against potential pandemic viruses. For more we're bringing in here Yahoo Finance Senior Health Reporter, Angeli Kamani. Ange. Yeah, like you mentioned, the NIH canceled more than $750, a million dollars, rather, in funding for Moderna. And this is something that the company found out just based on a notification to themselves, even though they were really expecting that to get into late stage development. They said in a statement, Moderna received notice that the Health and Human Services Department, remember led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy will terminate the award for the late stage development and rights to purchase the pre-pandemic influenza vaccines. Now, we went out to HHS to understand what their rationale was behind this. And among other things they mentioned that the MRNA technology remains quote, "under tested" and we are not going to spend taxpayer dollars repeating the mistakes of the last administration which concealed legitimate safety concerns from the public. And in that they're referring to the myocarditis that was evident in some males and some younger individuals. So, this is really just the latest setback for the company. We know it's been pummeled, the stock is down more than 30% on the year. This is one of the latest. So, we know that they pulled their filing of a combination flu and COVID vaccine earlier last week. Then we've got the NIH funding that's cutting the pandemic and bird flu. And then we've also got missing the Q1 estimates earlier this year. So, just really telling a really hard story for this company. We know it's been under pressure because of the waning COVID revenues, and these are just some of those areas that were supposed to sort of plug that hole. And now, without those in the way, it's a question on what Moderna's viability is. Now, on the flip side, you do have some good news, right? The company's still working on a number of clinical trials with Merck on cancer vaccine. It also has a partnership with Vertex on cystic fibrosis. So, they do have a few other things going for them, but this is really a longer play for the company rather than any near term that they would have otherwise been able to take advantage of. All right. Thanks, Angeli. Appreciate it. 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
Chicago Tribune
34 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Column: Court says Trump tariffs are presidential overreach
The Trump administration's arbitrary moves to restructure the international trade environment to accommodate White House whims have suddenly run into reality, specifically established laws. This confrontation is still in the early stages, but it does not bode well for President Donald Trump and his ardent protectionist associates. On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade went back to basics in a decision featuring the reminder that, under the Constitution, Congress has the authority to regulate trade. This fundamental power is not overridden by the ability of the president to address trade challenges in an emergency. 'The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President's use of tariffs as leverage,' a three-judge panel said in the decision to issue a permanent injunction on the blanket tariff orders issued by Trump since January. 'That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.' The ruling came in response to two lawsuits. One was filed by the Liberty Justice Center, a nonpartisan organization, on behalf of five small U.S. companies that import goods from countries targeted by Trump's tariffs. The other was filed by a dozen state governments within the U.S. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat, is coordinating the states' efforts against the administration. He has declared the tariffs to be economically devastating, reckless and unlawful. Small businesses seeking relief include an importer of wine and other alcoholic beverages based in New York and a maker of educational kits and musical instruments located in Virginia. President Trump has been basing his unilateral tariff authority on the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), passed by Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter near the end of December 1977. The law authorizes the president to declare 'an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,' with the proviso that such threats must originate, 'in whole or substantial part outside the United States,' and requires the president to provide updates to Congress every six months. An incentive for this legislation was a desire in Congress to clarify and restrict presidential actions justified under the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act, a law which reflected the emergency leading to U.S. entry into World War I as a formal declared combatant. The immediate incentive for our nation to enter that war was the declaration by Germany of unrestricted submarine warfare. The 1917 law had been used to justify a variety of presidential initiatives, not all related to foreign policy and international developments. Declared national emergencies then still technically in effect included the 1933 banking crisis related to the hoarding of cash and gold, the 1950 Korean War crisis, a 1970 emergency related to a strike by postal workers and a 1971 emergency related to the deteriorating fiscal condition of the federal government. Key powers granted include the ability to block transactions and take control of the assets of the parties involved in the threats. This section was used by the Trump administration to justify the new tariffs. IEEPA was passed during a time of congressional assertiveness. Another important factor, no doubt, was President Carter's fixation on clear, orderly administration, which he carried to extremes. The severe national crises, traumas and wars described above contrast with today's long-term growth and prosperity, and blessed absence of direct involvement in war. The judicial veto of presidential overreach shows our system is working.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Puerto Rico Allows LGBTQ+ People To Use 'X' Gender Marker On Birth Certificates
In what activists say is a landmark decision for Puerto Rico, a federal judge issued a ruling on Monday allowing nonbinary, intersex and gender-fluid individuals in the territory to adjust their birth certificate so that it accurately reflects their gender identity. Judge María Antongiorgi Jordán, of the Federal District of Puerto Rico, ordered the Demographic Registry to amend a form so that people can select 'X' as a gender marker on their birth certificate. Gov. Jenniffer González Colón said she was awaiting recommendations from the territory's Justice Department regarding the ruling, and applicants will have to wait to change their gender marker until the new form is available. 'At a time when nonbinary, gender nonconforming and trans communities are under attack, this historic decision opens the door to the full recognition of their dignity,' said Pedro Julio Serrano, activist and president of the LGBTQ+ Federation of Puerto Rico. 'We celebrate a milestone that allows the equality promised in the Constitution to be put in practice.' Trans people in Puerto Rico have been allowed to change their gender marker from 'male' to 'female' and vice versa since 2018, but until Monday could not choose an option that aligned with an identity outside the gender binary. This difference violates the right to equal protection of all people, according to the court order. 'The Court finds there is no rational basis to deny the plaintiff's request,' the order said. 'The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's current birth certificate policy arbitrarily distinguishes between binary and nonbinary individuals and subjects nonbinary individuals to disadvantaged treatment without any justification for doing so.' The ruling is in response to an October 2023 lawsuit against González Colón requesting the 'X' marker on birth certificates. The suit was filed by six nonbinary Puerto Ricans: Ínaru Nadia de la Fuente Díaz, Maru Rosa Hernández, André Rodil, Yelvy Vélez Bartolomei, Gé Castro Cruz and Deni Juste. The ruling 'represents a respite from so much repression … It's an unexpected victory,' de la Fuente Díaz told Puerto Rican outlet Todas. 'The fact that you wake up every day knowing that they're trying to take away your rights, and the next day you wake up and find that they won the lawsuit, that there's a possibility of continuing to fight in this political climate, shows once again that [U.S. President Donald Trump] doesn't have absolute power, nor does the government of Puerto Rico.' Puerto Rico has long had a history of grassroots activism that protects and uplifts the territory's LGBTQ+ communities — beating 30 states and other U.S. territories in overall LGBTQ+ rights and equity, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Trans and nonbinary Puerto Ricans had been able to choose a third gender marker on their passports since 2021, until Trump signed an executive order threatening it. The January order prohibits the use of 'X' on federal documents like U.S. passports, military IDs and Social Security cards — not state- and territory-issued papers like birth certificates and driver's licenses. Trump's order, which is policy and not law, was temporarily halted by a federal judge in April. At least 16 states and the District of Columbia currently allow citizens to use the 'X' gender marker on their birth certificates, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Many in the LGBTQ+ community have expressed concern about that changing under an administration actively working to roll back civil rights, but activists say they're determined to keep fighting for equality. 'This is proof that when you fight, you win,' said Ivana Fred Millán, director of the LGBTQ+ Federation that's made up of hundreds of individuals and more than 100 community and allied organizations. 'Even with so many attacks, the LGBTQ+ communities are still fighting to achieve the promised equality,' she continued. 'We will not take a step back and will continue fighting until equality is achieved.'
