Harvard University holds commencement while facing Trump administration pressure
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University is holding its commencement Thursday at a pivotal moment, when its place as one of the world's leading higher education institutions is under what increasingly seems like existential threats from the Trump administration.
Other schools face the loss of federal funding and their ability to enroll international students if they don't agree to the Trump administration's shifting demands. But Harvard, which was founded in 1636, a century and a half before the nation itself, is taking the lead on defying the White House in federal court — and paying a significant price.
The Trump administration's latest salvos include asking federal agencies to cancel about $100 million in contracts with the Ivy League school. The government already canceled more than $2.6 billion in federal research grants, moved to cut off Harvard's enrollment of international students and threatened its tax-exempt status.
Visa interviews for international students admitted to schools nationwide were halted on Tuesday, and Trump said Wednesday that Harvard should reduce its international enrollment from 25% to about 15%.
Sustained by a $53 billion endowment, the nation's oldest and wealthiest university is testing whether it can be a bulwark against Trump's efforts to limit what it calls antisemitic activism on campus, which Harvard sees as an affront to the freedom to teach and learn nationwide.
The Trump administration has demanded Harvard enact broad government and leadership reforms and changes to its admissions policies. It also demanded the university audit views of diversity on campus and stop recognizing some student clubs.
Dr. Abraham Verghese, the bestselling author and Stanford expert on infectious diseases, will be the principal speaker at the university's 374th commencement. On Wednesday, NBA Hall of Famer and activist Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was the 'Class Day' speaker, and journalist Christiane Amanpour addressed graduates of Harvard's Kennedy School.
Both praised Harvard for standing up to the Trump administration, with Abdul-Jabbar specifically calling out the actions of Harvard President Alan Garber.
'When a tyrannical administration tried to bully and threaten Harvard, to revoke their academic freedom and to destroy free speech, Dr. Alan Garber rejected the illegal and immoral pressures,' Abdul-Jabbar said to wide applause as he compared Garber's response to Rosa Parks' stand against racist segregation.
'After seeing so many cowering billionaires, media moguls, law firms, politicians and other universities bend their knee to an administration that is systematically strip-mining the U.S. Constitution, it is inspiring to me to see Harvard University take a stand for freedom,' he continued.
In response to the administration's threats, Harvard has sued to block the funding freeze and persuaded a federal judge to temporarily halt the enrollment ban. It is going to court in Boston on Thursday just as the commencement is wrapping up, hoping for a ruling that allows it to continue enrolling international students.
'We believe that the government overreach and devastating attacks on scientific and medical research are unwarranted and unlawful, and so we have taken legal action to defend the institution,' Garber said in an interview with a university publication.
'We should all be concerned that colleges and universities have increasingly come under attack. But we should not dismiss the criticisms even when they are based on distortions or inaccuracies — we need to look for the underlying concerns that can be embedded in them,' said Garber, who commissioned internal reports last year on antisemitism and anti-Arab prejudice at the Ivy League campus.
The Trump administration has said it wants 'to protect American students and faculty from antisemitic violence and harassment.' It cites campus protests against Israel. Like many college students around the country, Harvard students set up tents called on the university to divest from companies supporting Israel's military, which has leveled Gaza in response to attacks by Hamas.
Last year, hundreds of graduating students walked out of commencement chanting 'Free, free Palestine' after weeks of campus protests. Harvard also said some protesters would not receive diplomas alongside their classmates, although it eventually allowed most to get them.
This year, the anti-war demonstrations have largely faded from view, but protesters plan a silent vigil before Thursday's ceremony.
'As a graduate of Harvard, I am horrified by Israel's mass murder of Palestinians (including by deliberate starvation), its total leveling of Gaza, its targeting of hospitals, its assaults on Palestinian educational and cultural institutions, and its relentless killings of journalists,' Harvard graduate Victor Wallis explained in a statement.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vox
22 minutes ago
- Vox
The big, bad bond market could derail Trump's big, beautiful bill
is a senior correspondent and head writer for Vox's Future Perfect section and has worked at Vox since 2014. He is particularly interested in global health and pandemic prevention, anti-poverty efforts, economic policy and theory, and conflicts about the right way to do philanthropy. To pass a law in the United States, you need to jump through a lot of hurdles. A bill has to first clear a committee in the House or Senate. (In the case of Republicans' tax legislation this year, its components had to clear 11 different committees.) The House Rules Committee has to agree for it to come to the floor for a vote. It has to pass that vote. In the Senate, it has to get 60 votes to beat a potential filibuster, or else obey a set of byzantine rules allowing it to pass with a simple majority. But another entity gets a vote, an entity not mentioned in the Constitution or in congressional rules or even physically located in Washington, DC. That entity is the bond market, and right now, it is very pissed. Currently, the US makes up for any budget deficits it incurs by issuing bonds of various durations to cover the difference. It auctions those bonds — essentially IOUs issued by the Treasury Department — on the open market, where investors (banks, hedge funds, foreign central banks, pension funds, etc.) can bid on them. To get them to bid, the US has to pay interest on the bond. And when the US borrows a lot, and especially if its fiscal policy indicates that the country may reach a point where it can't pay back what it owes, investors will demand to receive more interest to compensate for the risk of default. That means the US has to pay more every year to service its past debt, and those payments in turn become future debt. If the interest they demand is high enough, the result can be an economic downturn, an upward debt spiral, or both. While politicians pay attention to all kinds of economic indicators, from the unemployment rate to the stock market, the bond market is a different and more powerful animal. The most famous quote about the bond market's power comes from former Bill Clinton adviser James Carville: 'I used to think if there was reincarnation, I wanted to come back as the president or the pope or a .400 baseball hitter. But now I want to come back as the bond market. You can intimidate everybody.' History is littered with cases of governments that were forced to abandon policies — or that even fell from power — because the bond market revolted. Just a few years ago in the UK, a mass sell-off by currency and bond traders forced the Tory government to abandon its plans for a massive deficit-ballooning tax cut and axe Chancellor of the Exchequer Kwasi Kwarteng, before then-Prime Minister Liz Truss herself was forced to resign after just 45 days in office. Banks like Citigroup were openly declaring that unless the UK got a different prime minister, the markets would continue to punish it. That is power. Now, Congress is weighing a reconciliation bill that would increase the deficit by at least $3 trillion over 10 years, and possibly closer to $5 trillion if some of its temporary components become permanent, as seems likely. This is a big increase in America's already substantial debt burden and markets are responding accordingly. Interest rates are heading higher, especially once you adjust for inflation. Countries once infamous for fiscal mismanagement — Greece, Spain, even Italy — can now borrow more cheaply than the United States can. The US is not the UK; the bond market cannot depose a president the way it can a prime minister, simply because prime ministers are far easier to swap out. But that doesn't mean that the bond market is powerless over US policy. It has the ability to make this tax bill much, much more costly for the US government and economy, and that ability could be decisive in shaping where the legislation goes from here. The bond market is mad about the debt The US issues a lot of different kinds of debt, but the kind you should pay closest attention to are 10-year bonds. These reflect the market's views on the medium- to long-run trajectory of the government and economy, whereas 30-day or six-month bonds are much shorter-run indicators. The interest rate that's most informative about government policy and long-run prospects is the 'real' rate, adjusted for inflation. If inflation is 4 percent, investors will probably add about 4 percentage points to the real interest rate to make sure their investment doesn't erode in value. The real rate thus reflects how much they expect to earn for essentially lending money to the US government in addition to just keeping up with overall prices. Here's the 10-year, adjusting for inflation, since the start of President Donald Trump's first term: Interest rates have been rising since 2022 or so. FRED In the aftermath of Covid, rates actually went negative after taking inflation into account. This is what's sometimes called the 'flight to safety': In times of crisis, investors often move away from risky assets like stocks and toward reliable, predictable ones, like US government bonds. That drives interest rates down, sometimes even below inflation. But since 2023 or so, rates have been much higher. There's a saying, popularized by economist Scott Sumner, that one should 'never reason from a price change': Changes in the Treasury interest rate (or the price of borrowing) could be from any number of factors, so it's too simplistic to look at what happened and say 'investors decided the US government became a riskier bet.' The Logoff The email you need to stay informed about Trump — without letting the news take over your life, from senior editor Patrick Reis. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. That said, when Fed economists analyzed the spike that occurred in 2023, they concluded the spike in rates was indeed due to investors reacting to changing economic conditions: The US was issuing more debt, the Federal Reserve was tightening to try to control inflation, and future economic growth in the US was looking sluggish. Other observers in the bond market have been sounding alarms, mostly citing excessive US borrowing. In 2023, Fitch, one of the three big credit rating agencies that issues risk evaluations of bonds, downgraded US debt, which previously had a perfect AAA rating. On May 16 of this year, Moody's, another of the three, followed suit, amid tax cut negotiations in Congress. Standard & Poor's, the third rater, had already downgraded the US after the 2011 debt ceiling fight, meaning there now isn't a single rating agency giving US debt top marks. As the 2023 downgrade indicates, this change isn't entirely due to Trump. Covid did a number on the US debt picture, with trillions of dollars in relief measures passed and implemented, and many months of lower revenues due to the 2020 recession. But in January, as Trump prepared to return to the White House, bond analysts were already forecasting higher rates, noting his penchant for tax cuts and lack of seriousness about deficits. On May 20, amid the tax fight in Congress, a batch of 20-year government bonds had trouble selling at auction, sending rates flying higher still. The bond market, it is fair to say, is not pleased with the direction this administration is going. High interest rates could hurt…real bad The nominal (that is, not adjusted for inflation) 10-year Treasury rate has grown from lows of around 3.6 percent in September to above 4.4 percent now. That, on its own, might not sound like a lot: only a 0.8-point increase? But if you apply even a small increase in interest costs to the tens of trillions of dollars in debt the US government has outstanding, you get a very big number. Case in point: The Congressional Budget Office, as it evaluates Trump and Republicans' tax and spending proposals, is assuming 10-year interest rates of 4.1 percent this year, falling to 3.8 percent over time. What if, instead, rates stayed higher — at 4.4 percent, say? Even that modest-sounding change would cost the US government $1.8 trillion over the next decade, per the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget; for scale, that's about what Trump's more extreme tariff plans are projected to bring in. How persistently high interest rates would affect federal interest payments over the next 10 years. Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget A bond market reaction that persistently pushes up rates like this could turn a 'merely' $3.1 trillion bill into a $5 trillion bill, raising the price tag by nearly 60 percent, without a single additional dollar in tax cuts or spending. By 2035, the US would be spending $2.1 trillion a year on interest, more than on defense or on Social Security, or on Medicare — some of the biggest portions of the federal budget. That constrains politicians in both parties quite severely. It makes it harder for Republicans to pass the tax cuts they want, because they now are meaningfully more expensive. Same goes for any deficit-financed spending that Democrats may want. Some politicians might say, 'Who cares? Voters care more about tax cuts than the deficit. Why should it matter to me if some number labeled 'deficit' goes up?' It may be true that voters can't easily parse the difference between a $1 and $2 trillion deficit. But they can definitely tell when things in their daily lives get more expensive, and higher interest costs will make everything more expensive. Thirty-year mortgage interest rates move in almost perfect tandem with long-term government bonds, as this chart from the Bipartisan Policy Center shows: Mortgage interest rates generally track movements in the interest rate on US government bonds. Bipartisan Policy Center This makes sense, if you think about it. When a bank issues a mortgage (or buys one from an issuer), it's lending money on a long-term basis in exchange for regular interest payments. That's exactly what an investor does when they buy a long-term government bond. Because mortgage borrowers (that is, homeowners) are typically considered riskier than the US government, they pay somewhat higher rates, but the two rates move together. If the US government starts paying more interest, mortgage borrowers will have to pay more interest too, so that banks lend to them rather than the federal government. That means that if the bond market sends rates on US debt higher, it's not just more expensive for the government; it's more expensive for anyone who borrows. That means homeowners with mortgages, anyone with credit card debt, anyone with a car loan, anyone taking a student loan, and, perhaps most importantly, businesses taking out loans to build factories or invest in research. Good luck getting a US manufacturing renaissance going with persistently high interest rates driven by high deficits. The odds are still high that Congress passes some kind of deficit-exploding tax bill. The House passed its version by a single vote, and while some Republican senators have voiced complaints, Republicans' 53-vote majority there means they can afford a few defectors and still pass something. Many of the Trump tax cuts passed in 2017 are set to expire next year, and the political urge to avoid a sudden spike in taxes will probably overwhelm whatever pressure the bond market brings to bear. The bond market is powerful, but Republican hatred of taxes may be more powerful. But important Republican policymakers are paying attention. House Budget committee chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) hinted to Politico's Victoria Guida that he thinks the markets may force more budget cuts than his party is inclined to support, saying, 'If the bond markets don't think we're serious, I'm not sure it will matter what we do, because they're going to dictate the terms.' And senators needed to get the package to the president's desk are watching too. 'Have you been watching what the bond markets are doing in relation to the one big, beautiful bill?' Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) asked. 'They're not thinking it's a very big, beautiful bill.'
Fox News
23 minutes ago
- Fox News
What's Ahead For The President's Reconciliation Bill
The House of Representatives' budget reconciliation plan, backed by President Trump, is headed to the Senate. The bill touched on nearly every aspect of President Trump's agenda, which Senate Leader John Thune hopes to have passed by July 4, 2025. The budget bill passed through the House with a slim majority, which concerns some Americans that it may face restraint in the Senate. U.S. Senator Katie Britt (R-AL) joins the Rundown to discuss the Senate's work on President Trump's reconciliation bill and Republicans' efforts to cut taxes, reduce spending, and create more U.S. jobs. She also describes her own bipartisan bill, which aims to improve childcare affordability and help parents re-enter the workforce. Not many people can say they've climbed to the top of Mount Everest, but FOX News Correspondent Mike Tobin can. Making it to the top is extremely dangerous and requires peak physical abilities. Mike joins the podcast to discuss the accomplishment, why he decided to climb Mount Everest, and what it was like to reach the top. Plus, commentary from Chief National Initiatives Officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Chuck DeVore. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Newsweek
26 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Approval Rating Remains Underwater With Republican Pollster
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's approval rating remains underwater, according to a poll conducted by a Republican-leaning pollster. The latest RMG Research/Napolitan News poll, conducted between May 20 and 29 among 3,000 registered voters, found 49 percent approve of the way Trump is doing his job, while 50 percent disapprove. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 1.8 percentage points. President Donald Trump speaks during a swearing in ceremony for interim U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C. Jeanine Pirro in the Oval Office of the White House on May 28, 2025 in Washington, DC. President Donald Trump speaks during a swearing in ceremony for interim U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C. Jeanine Pirro in the Oval Office of the White House on May 28, 2025 in Washington, It Matters There has been some evidence of Trump's approval rating ticking up slightly after a period of decline following the introduction of his "Liberation Day" tariffs in April. But Trump's approval rating remaining in the negative, albeit within the margin of error, with a Republican-leaning pollster could be a sign of alarm for the White House. What To Know The latest RMG Research/Napolitan News poll found Trump's approval rating has improved very slightly from a survey conducted in mid-May. The earlier survey showed Trump's approval rating had dipped into negative territory, with 48 percent approving of the job he is doing and 50 percent disapproving. Only one other RMG Research/Napolitan News poll conducted during Trump's second term has seen the president with a net negative approval rating. A survey conducted in mid-April, days after he unveiled his "Liberation Day" tariffs, sending stock markets into a tailspin and sparking recession fears, saw his approval rating at -3, with 48 percent approving of Trump's performance and 51 percent disapproving. All other surveys have seen Trump with an approval rating above water, with the highest approval rating of +18 coming in a survey conducted the week Trump returned to office in January, when 57 percent approving of the job he was doing and just 39 percent disapproving. What People Are Saying Political analyst Robert Collins, a professor at Dillard University, told Newsweek last week that Trump's approval rating is "inching up because the economy has stabilized and Trump has put a pause on his most draconian tariffs, which were unpopular. "However, if those draconian tariffs do go into effect, due to trade negotiations breaking down, and it causes prices to spike, then we can expect his approval rating to go back down. The current number is historically a little low for a president during this part of his second term, but not outside of the normal range." Democratic pollster Matt McDermott previously told Newsweek that small shifts in polls are "statistical noise," not signs of growing support. "What we're seeing is stagnation, not momentum," he said. "Trump is hoping to shift blame for a weakening economy, but it's not going to work. Voters know exactly who's responsible." What's Next Trump's approval rating will likely play a major role for the GOP in the 2026 midterm elections.
