Trump Admin Ordered to Restore Portions of Grants Stripped From UCLA
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A federal judge has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to restore some of the funding it cut from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) in July, handing a partial victory to the state's public university system which is facing a $1 billion settlement demand from the White House over accusations of antisemitism on campus.
Newsweek has reached out to UCLA via email for comment.
Why It Matters
The White House has cracked down on pro-Palestinian campus protests across the country since Trump returned to office in January. Much of the initiative has involved withholding or freezing hundreds of millions in federal funds for schools that the administration accuses of not doing enough to prevent antisemitism.
UCLA was a site of widespread protests last year against the Israeli government's military actions in the Gaza Strip. The university's response to the demonstrations was sharply criticized, particularly after counterprotesters attacked the pro-Palestinian encampment.
People walk on the plaza outside Royce Hall, the site of 2024 pro-Palestinian protests, on the UCLA campus on July 30, 2025 in Los Angeles.
People walk on the plaza outside Royce Hall, the site of 2024 pro-Palestinian protests, on the UCLA campus on July 30, 2025 in Los Angeles.What To Know
Judge Rita F. Lin of the Northern District Court of California, who issued the order on Tuesday, had in June barred the National Science Foundation (NSF) from terminating grants to University of California researchers.
UCLA said in early August that the Trump administration had suspended $584 million in federal grants.
In her Tuesday ruling, which Newsweek has reviewed, Lin said in the directive, referring to her earlier order, that the NSF was in violation after cutting off funding to UCLA and she ruled that suspended grants be restored.
"NSF's actions violate the preliminary injunction," Lin said in the ruling.
"Therefore, pursuant to the preliminary injunction, NSF's suspension of the grants at issue here is VACATED."
It was not immediately clear how much funding would be returned to the campus.
The Trump administration is also seeking a $1 billion settlement from UCLA after a Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division investigation issued a finding on July 29 that the college violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students."
UCLA is one of at least eight elite colleges—all in states or districts that voted blue in 2024—that face having their funding and grants cut after being accused of antisemitism over pro-Palestinian protests or op-eds.
Many have also been told to change their practices to fall in line with the Trump administration's stance on diversity initiatives, "wokeism," and transgender-inclusive policies.
The University of California said last week it was reviewing the $1 billion settlement offer by the Trump administration.
The college's president, James B. Milliken, said the size of the proposed settlement would "devastate" the university.
What People Are Saying
Politico cited attorney for the plaintiffs Claudia Polsky, saying after the Tuesday ruling: "We are delighted that millions of dollars of grants wrongfully held hostage in the administration's political negotiations with UCLA will now be restored."
Attorney General Pam Bondi, referring to the July 29 finding by the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, said: "This disgusting breach of civil rights against students will not stand: DOJ will force UCLA to pay a heavy price for putting Jewish Americans at risk and continue our ongoing investigations into other campuses in the UC system."
What Happens Next
In her ruling, Lin ordered a joint status report by August 19, 2025, to confirm all steps to comply with the Preliminary Injunction have been completed by NSF.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
a few seconds ago
- Washington Post
What will Trump's Alaska summit achieve?
You're reading the Prompt 2025 newsletter. Sign up to get it in your inbox. The highly anticipated Trump-Putin summit will take place tomorrow in Anchorage. On the agenda: how to end the Ukraine war. The meeting is sure to provide much theater, but will it yield anything else? I sat down with my colleagues David Ignatius and Max Boot to discuss. — Damir Marusic, assignment editor 💬 💬 💬 Damir Marusic Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk reportedly said, 'I have many fears and a lot of hope.' David, Max, how are you feeling ahead of the sit-down? David Ignatius For me, it's a mix of hope and dread. The hope is that President Donald Trump, having committed so much to ending a war that he rightly condemns as a bloodbath, will lean hard enough on Russian President Vladimir Putin to get terms that reasonable people could sell to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his country. The fear is that Trump will simply listen to Putin's demands and either seek to impose them on Ukraine or walk away from his diplomatic mission. If I had to guess, I'd opt for the fearful version. Max Boot I have more fear than hope. I see no indication that Putin is going to call off his war (which is making little progress on the ground). The offer Putin apparently made to special envoy Steve Witkoff — he is demanding that Ukraine turn over unconquered, well-defended territory in the Donetsk region in return for a ceasefire — is a nonstarter for Ukraine. Story continues below advertisement Advertisement Damir I'm maybe a bit more optimistic. Not in the sense that there will be any progress, but the opposite: The White House seems to be lowering expectations about what's possible. Trump on Monday told reporters, 'It's not up to me to make a deal.' Max Yes, I'm mildly cheered to see the White House lowering expectations. But I also know that Trump is mercurial and unpredictable, and he loves surprises. So the chances of Putin-Trump meeting in private and hatching some kind of deal (or, more exactly, the framework of a deal) and Trump coming back to proclaim 'peace for our time' are not negligible. I don't see that as the likeliest outcome — and I am also buoyed by the fact that Trump was able to say no to a bad offer from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un at their last summit — but it's a real danger. David Trump's flair for the dramatic is what got him into this negotiation in the first place. And recalling his diplomacy with Kim, it's hard to imagine him just having a 'listening exercise' and then saying, 'See you later, Vlad.' One way or another, I suspect Trump will want some drama. Max My concern level will rise if Trump and Putin meet alone, with only interpreters. That's what happened at their last meeting in Helsinki, and it was a disaster. I hope Trump will take Secretary of State Marco Rubio, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg and others into the room with him (but preferably not Witkoff, who has proved very credulous in dealing with Putin). David An important baseline for Anchorage will come today, when Trump speaks with European leaders and Zelensky about what Europe might do to support Ukraine against continuing Russian aggression even if the U.S. backs away. Story continues below advertisement Advertisement Damir The danger for me seems to be that Trump is still in thrall to the idea that everyone just wants to make money. During that Monday news conference, in the same breath as he said it was not up to him to make a deal, he seemed to hold out hope that normalizing economic relations with Russia could bring Putin to the table, saying that Putin has to get back to rebuilding his country. David Trump has always had a fantasy that there are 'trillions' to be made in a future Russia. People keep trying to talk him out of that misjudgment, I'm told. Yet it persists. Weird. Max I thought reality was dawning for Trump last month when he started denouncing Putin for having nice conversations but then continuing to bomb civilian centers. Trump was finally on the right track in threatening massive sanctions and agreeing to supply weapons to Ukraine (albeit with the Europeans buying them first). But then he did another U-turn last week, following Witkoff's meeting with Putin, again blaming Zelensky for starting the war and pretending that Putin is interested in peace. The whole summit is built on a fundamental misunderstanding: Trump thinks Putin wants to end the war. What Putin really wants is to win the war. David Trump has tried every possible approach to diplomacy. Term sheets. Timelines. High-level meetings. But he keeps coming back to his core idea that it's only a meeting between the two big guys — him and Putin — that can resolve this, so we end up in Anchorage with very little work done on the shape of a settlement or clarity about what it might involve. Story continues below advertisement Advertisement Damir Is there any sense that Trump still has the 'stick' of secondary sanctions in mind? Max I don't know what Trump will do, but if he's serious about making a deal with Putin, he first has to impose the full gamut of pressure and wait for the sanctions to bite. He is making a major blunder by prematurely rushing into a summit when there is no indication that Putin will make any concessions. David I think Trump would love to use China and India as leverage to get Putin to make concessions. I'm told that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has included Ukraine in his conversations with Chinese officials, and obviously Trump has threatened India with heavy secondary sanctions if it continues to buy oil from Russia. But my guess is that these efforts will fade if Trump encounters an immovable obstacle in Putin on Friday. Damir An immovable Putin wouldn't cause him to double down, but fold? Is it TACO all over again? Max Trump has said he may conclude there is no deal to be had and walk away. That's fine, if it happens. The question is what happens next. Will he just ignore the entire war, thereby giving Putin a free hand? Or will he return to his threats of sanctions for Russia to punish Putin for intransigence? Trump doesn't have to insert himself into the peacemaking process — ultimately, it will be up to Russia and Ukraine to make peace, and thus far Putin is not even willing to meet Zelensky — but Trump does need to continue backing Ukraine. David I don't like the TACO analogy. It just eggs Trump on, as near as I can tell. I think the question for Trump is how much he's willing to risk to gain a peace in Ukraine that's desperately important for Europe but less so for the United States. And the answer, probably, is that he's not willing to risk much.
Bloomberg
a few seconds ago
- Bloomberg
Israel Set to Expand in West Bank to ‘Bury' Palestinian State
Israel plans to expand settlements into an area of the West Bank that would effectively bisect the enclave — a move its finance minister said 'buries the idea of a Palestinian state.' The expansion into the 3,000 acres known as E1 that run between Jerusalem and Ma'ale Adumim — long excluded from settlement plans — would amount to a major rebuke of growing Western calls to recognize Palestinian statehood. It comes as the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has authorized a large-scale increase in settlement building in the West Bank — widely considered a violation of international law — over the past year and plans to take over the Gaza Strip.
a few seconds ago
Ukraine, left out in Trump-Putin summit, fears setbacks on key peace issues
LONDON -- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned that the Friday meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin "will not achieve anything" if peace talks exclude Ukraine. Decisions taken without Kyiv's input will be "stillborn decisions," Zelenskyy continued. "They are unworkable decisions. And we all need real and genuine peace," the president said in an address to the nation last weekend. Ukrainian expectations for the summit in Alaska are low, amid fears in Kyiv that the American and Russian leaders will seek to dictate Ukraine's future without its participation. Zelenskyy's talks with European leaders and Trump on Wednesday, though, did appear to find consensus on key Ukrainian demands according to subsequent statements from Zelenskyy and his European counterparts, including that Kyiv will be the one to decide on any territorial concessions and that no such concessions can occur without binding security guarantees. "We must learn from the experience of Ukraine, [and] our partners, to prevent deception by Russia," Zelenskyy said in a statement posted to social media on Wednesday. "There is no sign now that the Russians are preparing to end the war," he added. "Our coordinated efforts and joint steps -- of Ukraine, the United States, Europe, all countries that want peace -- can definitely force Russia to make peace." Trump said Wednesday after the virtual meeting with Zelenskyy and European leaders that there will be "severe consequences" against Russia if Putin did not agree to stop his war on Ukraine. Oleksandr Merezhko -- a member of the Ukrainian parliament and chair of the body's foreign affairs committee -- likened the coming Alaska summit to the 1938 Munich Agreement -- a pre-World War II accord by which European powers allowed Nazi Germany to annex part of Czechoslovakia without Prague's consent. "Putin secured a one-on-one meeting with Trump, providing an opportunity to influence U.S. policy and push for abandonment of Ukraine and European allies," Merezhko told ABC News. "Putin would like to use the summit to persuade Trump to blame Ukraine for the lack of progress on a ceasefire and give him a pretext to walk away from the negotiations," Merezhko said. "Putin is a very masterful manipulator and he will go into Friday's meeting well prepared," Merezhko added. "He will go in with well-prepared, planned and rehearsed talking points." John E. Herbst, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine now working at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, said Putin "wants a deal with Trump that will be presented to Kyiv and other European capitals as a fait accompli." The Kremlin's goals remain the "elimination of Ukraine as a state and as a culture, elimination of NATO and undermining of the U.S. global positions," Pavel Luzin, a Russian political analyst at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts, told ABC News. There are several key -- and thorny -- issues for the two leaders to discuss. Territory Territory has been a main source of conflict between the two countries since Russia's annexation of Crimea and fomentation of separatist revolt in eastern Ukraine in 2014. Putin has remained firm in his demands. Any peace settlement, Moscow has said, must include "international legal recognition" of its 2014 annexation of Crimea and four regions it has occupied to varying degrees since launching its full-scale invasion in 2022. Russia demanded that Ukrainian troops withdraw entirely from the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions -- including areas that Russian troops do not control. The Kremlin claimed to have annexed all four regions in September 2022. Moscow also wants Kyiv to give up on any designs on taking back occupied Crimea. Ahead of Friday's meeting, Trump suggested that a "swapping of territories" could lead to a peace deal. However, Ukrainian officials quickly rejected that idea. Zelenskyy held that the country would not give up any of its land, saying in a Saturday statement, "Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupiers." The president has since said that any decisions on territorial concessions must be made by Ukraine, and that no such concessions can occur without Ukraine receiving binding security guarantees that include the U.S. NATO ambitions Russian officials are also looking for their own "security guarantees" regarding NATO, by which Ukraine would be permanently excluded from the alliance, which has a mutual defense agreement among members. Putin has regularly expressed concern over NATO's eastward expansion, framing the alliance's growth as an existential security threat to Russia. He has repeatedly warned the alliance against accepting Ukraine as a member, accusing the organization of trying to turn the country into a launch pad for aggression. Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister, Alexander Grushko, said in March that Moscow is seeking "the neutral status of Ukraine, the refusal of NATO countries to accept it into the alliance." Ukrainian officials have continued in their bid to join NATO -- an ambition that has the backing of the vast majority of Ukrainians and is enshrined in the national constitution. During a news conference earlier this year, Zelenskyy offered to step down from the presidency in exchange for admission to NATO. "If to achieve peace you really need me to give up my post -- I'm ready. I can trade it for NATO membership, if there are such conditions." NATO nations, while backing Ukraine in its defensive war, have refused to allow Kyiv's accession to the alliance. The alliance agreed at a 2008 summit that Ukraine "will become a member of NATO," but the leaders of key allied nations -- including the U.S. -- have said Kyiv cannot accede while it is at war. Limits to Ukraine's military Russian officials have demanded limits to the size of Ukraine's military, which Moscow has framed as necessary to ensure its own security -- a claim dismissed by Kyiv as false. During peace negotiations in the opening days of the full-scale invasion, Moscow demanded that Ukraine reduce its military size to 50,000. Zelenskyy, however, has expressed concern that any reductions to Ukraine's military could allow Russia to secure more Ukrainian land, even with Western support. "The best thing is a strong army, a large army, the largest army in Europe. We simply have no right to limit the strength of our army in any case," he said in December. Russia is also demanding limits on Ukraine's weapons arsenals and the sophistication of its military technology. In the days leading up to Friday's meeting between Trump and Putin, Ukraine has increased its long-range drone strikes into Russia. Ukrainian officials have said such attacks are part of its strategy to force the Kremlin into genuine peace talks. Sanctions The lifting of international sanctions on Russia may also be discussed during Friday's meeting. Russia is currently the world's most sanctioned country with "50,000 or so measures," according to The Center for European Policy Analysis. Russian officials have stated that a peace treaty should include lifting sanctions imposed since 2022. The European Union has refused requests to reduce sanctions against Russia before a peace deal is secured, and Zelenskyy has called Putin's suggestion that reductions could lead to lasting peace "manipulative." Trump has threatened to impose further sanctions on Russia and its top trading partners if Putin fails to commit to a ceasefire. Earlier this month, the U.S. announced additional tariffs on India related to its purchases of Russian oil. "Everyone sees that there has been no real step from Russia toward peace, no action on the ground or in the air that could save lives," Zelenskyy said earlier this week. "That is why sanctions are needed, pressure is needed."
