logo
UCLA funding freeze and civil rights crisis: A complete timeline of federal actions and settlements

UCLA funding freeze and civil rights crisis: A complete timeline of federal actions and settlements

Time of India4 hours ago
The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) has been embroiled in a complex civil rights and funding crisis that has unfolded over the past year. At the center of the controversy are accusations by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) that the university failed to adequately address antisemitic incidents on campus.
These allegations have resulted in significant federal funding freezes, costly settlements, and heightened scrutiny of the institution's policies and campus climate.
A complete timeline of the federal actions and settlements involving UCLA, based on Associated Press reports, is outlined below.
Early 2024: Initial DOJ investigation and funding suspensions
In early 2024, the Trump administration began scrutinising UCLA following civil rights complaints related to antisemitic incidents and other campus issues.
The DOJ's Civil Rights Division launched an investigation that concluded UCLA had acted with 'deliberate indifference' by allowing a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students during the 2024 pro-Palestinian protests. During these protests, demonstrators allegedly blocked access to campus classrooms and areas, further exacerbating tensions.
As a result, the administration froze $339 million in federal research grants, including approximately $240 million from the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
These Are The Most Beautiful Women In The World
5minstory.com
Undo
The National Science Foundation also confirmed suspensions citing misalignment with agency priorities. The Department of Energy joined in, citing admissions practices it deemed discriminatory, such as soliciting applicants' race in personal statements and considering socioeconomic factors in ways that disadvantaged white, Jewish, and Asian American applicants.
Affirmative action in California had been banned since 1996 and was further curtailed by a 2023 Supreme Court ruling.
In addition to antisemitism allegations, the Department of Energy criticised UCLA's handling of women's athletics, particularly regarding transgender athlete participation.
Mid-2024: Legal settlements and administrative responses
In response to the mounting pressure, UCLA reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and one Jewish professor who sued the university over the hostile campus environment during the protests. As part of the settlement, the university pledged $2.3 million to several organisations dedicated to combating antisemitism and supporting Jewish students.
UCLA also established an Office of Campus and Community Safety and implemented new policies for managing protests.
Chancellor Julio Frenk described the funding freeze as 'deeply disappointing' and warned about the adverse effects on ongoing research and academic work. He emphasised that the severe penalties failed to address the underlying issues and instead threatened critical scientific progress.
Late 2024: Expanded funding freeze and escalating federal pressure
By late 2024, the funding freeze escalated significantly. Reports from
The New York Times
an
d The Los Angeles Times
detailed that nearly $200 million in science, medical, and academic research grants were suspended, affecting hundreds of ongoing projects.
The National Science Foundation alone cancelled approximately 300 grants worth $180 million. These funds supported research in fields including biomedicine, engineering, public health, and artificial intelligence.
Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly stated that UCLA exhibited 'deliberate indifference' to antisemitic incidents and warned of 'a heavy price' for failing to protect civil rights. The university continued to deny wrongdoing but committed to concrete reforms and further cooperation with federal authorities.
Early 2025: $1 billion settlement demand and broader context
In August 2025, the Trump administration formally demanded a $1 billion settlement from UCLA, marking the largest such penalty ever sought from a public university. The DOJ charged UCLA with violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to prevent a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students. The allegations mainly focused on the university's handling of protests related to the Israel-Hamas war in 2024, during which violence and arrests occurred.
California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the demand as political extortion, asserting that California would not capitulate as some private universities have. James B. Milliken, newly appointed president of the University of California system, called the settlement 'devastating' for the public university system and stated UCLA's willingness to engage in a 'good faith dialogue' with the DOJ.
This demand follows a pattern of settlements with other universities, including $50 million from Brown University and $221 million from Columbia University, with Harvard University reportedly facing ongoing negotiations.
Implications for students, research, and higher education
The frozen federal funds and pending settlements have severe consequences for UCLA's research community. Funding suspensions threaten faculty-led projects, graduate student fellowships, and vital scientific advancements. Chancellor Frenk highlighted the potential damage to both UCLA and national interests, noting the university's role in conducting groundbreaking research.
The federal government's strategy appears to increasingly link civil rights compliance to research funding, leveraging financial pressure as a means of enforcement.
The Columbia settlement, which restored over $400 million in research grants following a $200 million penalty, may serve as a template for how the government addresses other institutions.
For UCLA students and faculty, the crisis has created uncertainty around academic programs and research opportunities. While the university maintains its commitment to an inclusive and safe campus environment, the ongoing negotiations and legal challenges suggest that the institution faces a challenging road ahead.
UCLA's funding freeze and civil rights crisis reflect broader national debates around campus climate, civil rights enforcement, and the role of federal oversight in higher education. As the 2026 elections approach, further actions of this nature may emerge, placing more universities under scrutiny. The resolution of UCLA's case will likely have significant implications for how public universities balance institutional reform with academic freedom and scientific innovation.
TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us
here.
Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says ‘we'll see what happens' on China tariffs as midnight deadline looms
Trump says ‘we'll see what happens' on China tariffs as midnight deadline looms

Indian Express

time28 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

Trump says ‘we'll see what happens' on China tariffs as midnight deadline looms

US President Donald Trump said on Monday he would 'see what happens' regarding a tariff deadline for China set for later in the day, Reuters reports. 'They've been dealing quite nicely. The relationship is very good with President Xi and myself,' Trump told reporters at a press conference. The United States and China have been in trade talks over tariffs that Trump reintroduced earlier this year as part of his administration's push to reduce the trade deficit and address what he says are unfair trade practices. The measures include higher duties on a range of Chinese goods, with further increases scheduled unless a deal is reached.

Confident of 6th round of India-US trade talks: Officials to House panel
Confident of 6th round of India-US trade talks: Officials to House panel

Business Standard

time28 minutes ago

  • Business Standard

Confident of 6th round of India-US trade talks: Officials to House panel

Top government officials on Monday told a parliamentary panel that India's relations with the US were multifaceted, and not restricted to trade issues. They were, however, confident that the sixth round of negotiations on the India-US Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) would take place as a US trade team is scheduled to visit India on August 25 for talks. To questions by panel members on India's defence ties, the officials rejected recent reports that have claimed that New Delhi has halted its purchases of defence equipment from the US. They said the government-to-government engagement between the two countries on all other issues remains normal, but conceded to rough spots over trade that need ironing out. Top officials of the ministries of external affairs and commerce, and industry briefed the members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs on 'the current development in India's foreign policy with special reference to the US-India trade negotiations and tariffs'. Congress Lok Sabha member Shashi Tharoor heads the panel. At the conclusion of the meeting, Tharoor said that Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri told the panel that India's relationship with the US is multi-dimensional, and trade is just one aspect of this, but New Delhi continues to engage with Washington DC on many subjects. Tharoor said that negotiations on the proposed trade deal between the two countries will continue. The members asked more than 50 questions on India-US relations, including on trade, which the commerce secretary answered in detail. Tharoor said the Alaska meeting between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin could pave the way for the lifting of the 25 per cent penalty that the White House has imposed on India for its purchase of Russian oil. However, the impact of the 25 per cent tariff that the US has slapped on India is impacting the country, and needs to be reduced. The officials said the US imposing unilateral, punitive measures on third countries, in the context of India's purchase of Russian oil, only serves to erode trust and distorts global trade norms. 'Despite the recent developments, we remain committed to engaging constructively with our partners, including the US, to resolve all outstanding issues through dialogue and mutual respect,' one of the officials told the members. Members of the panel asked questions about the Trump administration hosting Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Asim Munir twice in a span of one-and-a-half months. They also wanted to know whether Trump has imposed a high tariff and penalty on India for not being 'credited' for mediating the peace between India and Pakistan.

How this ‘first-ever' financial arrangement may have helped Nvidia and AMD secure licenses for selling AI chips in China
How this ‘first-ever' financial arrangement may have helped Nvidia and AMD secure licenses for selling AI chips in China

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

How this ‘first-ever' financial arrangement may have helped Nvidia and AMD secure licenses for selling AI chips in China

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Nvidia and AMD have received approval to sell their specially designed AI chips in China, but reportedly with an unusual condition. According to a new report, the Trump administration granted the export licenses after a " financial arrangement " was made. As part of this deal, both chipmakers have agreed to give the US government 15% of the revenue from their chip sales in China. Citing people familiar with the situation – including a US official – The Finanacial Times reported that the agreement was finalised last week. Nvidia will share 15% of revenues from its H20 chip sales, while AMD will provide the same percentage from its MI308 chip sales. The official noted that the administration has not yet decided how the funds will be used. The deal is a quid-pro-quo arrangement. Export control experts state that this is the first time a US company has agreed to pay a portion of its revenue to obtain export licenses, the report added. However, the agreement aligns with a broader pattern in the Trump administration, where companies are pressured to make concessions—such as domestic investments—to avoid tariffs and bring jobs and revenue to the U.S. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top Urologist: Most Muscle Loss in Older Men Starts With This One Mistake primenutritionsecrets Undo The Financial Times reported that the Commerce Department began issuing H20 export licenses on Friday, just two days after Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang met with President Donald Trump. The US official confirmed that licenses for AMD's China chip have also been issued. Nvidia did not deny the arrangement, stating only, 'We follow rules the US government sets for our participation in worldwide markets.' Experts debate over Nvidia H20 chip sale to China While the US government has approved the sale of H20 AI chips to China, some experts have reportedly expressed concerns. It is being argued that H20 AI chips are a 'potent accelerator of China's frontier AI capabilities' and would ultimately be used by the Chinese military. However, Nvidia has refuted these claims, saying that they are 'misguided'. 'While we haven't shipped H20 to China for months, we hope export control rules will let America compete in China and worldwide. America cannot repeat 5G and lose telecommunication leadership. America's AI tech stack can be the world's standard if we race,' Nvidia said on Saturday. Microsoft Edge Gets a Major AI Upgrade with New Copilot Mode AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now

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