Trump Administration Seeks $1 Billion From UCLA to Restore Research Funding
The Trump administration is asking for $1 billion from UCLA as part of a proposed settlement to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in suspended federal research funding, according to a draft agreement.The proposal lays out a $1 billion payment to the U.S. government, along with a $172 million contribution to a fund for individuals affected by civil rights violations. The negotiations follow the administration's suspension of roughly $584 million in research support for the university.If accepted, the proposal would be the largest financial settlement yet between the federal government and a university. In separate agreements with the Trump administration, Columbia University agreed to pay $221 million and Brown University committed $50 million.University of California President James Milliken confirmed Friday that the school received the document from the Department of Justice and is currently reviewing it."As a public university, we are stewards of taxpayer resources, and a payment of this scale would completely devastate our country's greatest public university system as well as inflict great harm on our students and all Californians,' Milliken said in a statement.
The Trump administration's actions come weeks after UCLA settled a lawsuit related to campus protests over the war in Gaza in spring 2024. The Justice Department has since alleged the university violated civil rights law by failing to prevent demonstrators from blocking Jewish students during pro-Palestinian demonstrations.UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk confirmed that the university had already seen hundreds of millions in research dollars suspended. The university relies heavily on these grants and contracts — they make up more than 10% of UCLA's total revenue."We share the goal of eradicating antisemitism across society," Frenk wrote in a statement to the campus community, expressing his "deep disappointment" with the news. "This far-reaching penalty of defunding life-saving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination." The federal proposal also includes non-financial conditions, such as appointing a monitor to ensure compliance, eliminating race-based scholarships and ending the use of diversity statements in hiring. Similar to the settlements reached with Columbia and Brown, the draft contains a provision intended to keep U.S. officials from interfering directly with academic freedom, admissions and hiring through the use of settlements.The draft proposal is the latest move in a series of actions taken by the Trump administration to reshape higher education policy, particularly in regards to campus speech and diversity initiatives. While much of this attention has focused on elite private schools, UCLA is the first major public university to face these demands at this scale.
California Governor Gavin Newsom, an ex officio member of the university's board of regents and notable critic of the Trump administration, vowed that UCLA would not bow to these demands.'There's principles. There's right and wrong, and we'll do the right thing, and what President Trump is doing is wrong, and everybody knows it,' Newsom said. "[I will] do everything in my power to encourage [UC] to do the right thing and not to become another law firm that bends on their knees, another company that sells their soul or another institution that takes a short cut and takes the easy wrong versus the hard right.'Still, university leaders have shown a willingness to talk."[We've agreed] to engage in dialogue with the federal administration,' Milliken said, though he emphasized that UCLA has already taken "extensive" steps to address antisemitism.Whether UCLA will accept the terms or follow Harvard University in pursuing a legal challenge remains to be seen. As negotiations continue, the outcome could set a precedent for other public institutions navigating an evolving federal funding landscape under the current administration.
This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on Aug 8, 2025, where it first appeared.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's new trade world is built around recent deals. The problem: We still don't know many details.
This past week saw Donald Trump move forward with a suite of new tariffs built around recent pacts that set headline rates of 10% to 20% for major partners who came to the table. But in recent days, there's also been confusion about what exactly many of these nations agreed to. As trade teams have moved through Washington, D.C., the issues have taken various forms, from how overlapping sectoral tariffs will work to the details of how foreign nations will invest billions in the US — not to mention an ongoing scramble for exemptions. It's been a clear snag for anyone looking for certainty after months of negotiating ups and downs. The larger problem, for now at least, is that nearly all these pacts remain in a sort of handshake phase. The confusion is a reflection of agreements that are still not finalized, and publicly announced elements are being interpreted differently by each side. Indeed, recent high-profile announcements alongside the European Union, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Vietnam all remain short of a joint statement from both sides — a key step in laying out areas of agreement. Not to mention legally binding texts. The dynamic has been in evidence on a nearly daily basis, and perhaps nowhere are the various sides talking past each other more than on plans for foreign nations to invest billions in the US. Trump has often described the agreements as akin to a cash handover — a "signing bonus," in his view. But with a very different view of the deals from the other side of the table. It's just one front likely to weigh on importers — including those importing from other countries facing higher "bespoke" rates as high as 50% — as companies may want certainty. But all sides are well aware that Trump has repeatedly reserved the right to raise rates if he feels these deals aren't working out to his liking. Two exceptions are recently struck deals, which have seen a few more formal details, including a joint statement with Indonesia and more technical language on an agreement with the United Kingdom, but with plenty of open questions there as well. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet A series of disputes over sectoral tariffs Sector-specific tariffs that Trump is also in the process of enacting on key industries have been a key point of contention, from how existing auto tariffs will overlap to forthcoming duties on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals. On the semiconductor front, Trump paired his Wednesday enactment of "reciprocal" tariffs with the floating of a plan for 100% tariffs "on all chips and semiconductors coming into the United States." Within hours, trade officials in the European Union and South Korea followed up with an announcement that they would instead be exempt because of their deals. The dynamic had also been in evidence on pharmaceuticals, where Trump has also promised triple-digit rates. Left unclear is how these forthcoming duties — set to be levied under separate national security tariff powers in Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 — will impact countries that have struck deals, if at all. Even a White House fact sheet, despite Trump's comments, says that "the European Union will pay the United States a tariff rate of 15%, including on autos and auto parts, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductors." Another point of contention this week is auto tariffs, which are already facing these so-called 232 tariffs of 25%. The terms of recent deals apparently include lowering those rates to 15% for the European Union, Japan, and South Korea, but this has not been enacted yet. That fact led Japan's top trade official to travel to Washington in recent days to see why the currently verbal agreement on autos hadn't been enacted. Ryosei Akazawa met with Trump's team and told reporters Thursday that he'd received assurances that the situation would soon be remedied. But there remains no official comment from the US side on when action, which would likely require executive action from the president, will be forthcoming. Read more: 5 ways to tariff-proof your finances Additional confusion around foreign investment deals The confusion has perhaps been most noticeable around agreements for increased foreign investment — $600 billion in potential money from Europe, $550 billion from Japan, and $350 billion from South Korea — which the White House has touted as key elements of these respective agreements. These varied investment promises have been backed up by only the sketchiest details and have taken different shapes between different countries. The Europeans say their $600 billion is simply a reflection of companies that "have expressed interest." Meanwhile, the South Korean and Japanese agreements have been sketched out as more akin to a fund to help spur private investments with additional financing resources. The formal White House fact sheet describes the Japanese agreement as a "Japanese/USA investment vehicle." But Trump has again and again — including Tuesday on CNBC — described it very differently. "I got a signing bonus from Japan of $550 billion," he said of that deal, adding, "It's our money to invest as we like." He was then pressed on Europe and the lack of details there and shot back, "Well, there are no details: The details are $600 billion to invest in anything I want." The president then reiterated, as he often does, that he plans to enforce these agreements through the constant threat of raising tariffs again. That got a response from Akazawa, the Japanese trade negotiator who was already in Washington over auto issues, who reportedly offered a very different description of the plan to reporters as "a commitment to invest in the US where there are benefits for Japan as well." He added: "We can't cooperate on anything that does not benefit Japan." Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices 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
Associated Press
20 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Some Democrats want new leadership. Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden says he has what it takes to resist Trump
WASCO, Ore. (AP) — Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden is in his fifth decade in Congress and showing no inclination to step aside even as pressure builds on aging Democratic officeholders to give way to a new generation. He says he plans to seek another term in 2028, when he will be 79 years old. He has traveled to all 36 Oregon counties every year he has been in the Senate and intends to keep doing so. After a recent town hall in Wasco in conservative Sherman County, Wyden said questions about age are 'fair game for debate' but that he is still up to the job and the fight against Republican President Donald Trump's policies. 'I believe you ought to be held accountable,' he told The Associated Press in an interview. 'But I think that the Founding Fathers wanted a results-oriented, commonsense approach to government, and that's what I'm trying to do. And I've got the energy.' Calls for a new generation of leaders Many Democrats have lingering anguish about Joe Biden's decision to seek a second White House term despite persistent concerns about whether he was up to the job at age 81. He dropped out in July 2024 and Trump went on to defeat then-Vice President Kamala Harris. 'I've consistently called for all elected officials over the age of 70 to make this their final term — to step down with dignity and make room for the next generation of leaders,' said Amanda Litman, co-founder and president of Run for Something, a group that supports progressive young candidates. Many Democrats feel Biden stepped withdrew too late and cost the party the presidency. Multiple Democratic senators have announced this year that they won't seek reelection, including 80-year-old Dick Durbin of Illinois. Durbin's career in Congress began in 1983, two years after Wyden joined the House. Litman said she hopes another Democrat emerges to challenge Wyden. 'I think competitive primaries in particular are how we as a party decide what we believe,' she said. 'Every Oregonian counts' Wyden continues to travel across his state engaging with voters of all political stripes. The Wasco town hall was the 23rd he has held this year, and the 1,125th town hall of his career. Some 20 people gathered at a former grade school nestled among wheat fields and wind turbines. 'Every Oregonian counts, no matter where they live,' Wyden told them. As other Democrats grapple over strategy, the senator says the old-school town hall tradition has become a key communication tool in an era of deepening division. 'I believe the town meetings are more important now than ever, because they allow for an opportunity in a community to chip away at some of the polarization and the mistrust,' he told the AP. That stands in contrast to congressional Republicans, who in recent months have largely avoided town hall meetings, where they often face protesters. The National Republican Campaign Committee recently encouraged GOP lawmakers to promote the new tax breaks and spending cuts law, but in smaller settings they can control. A civil exchange Some 75% of Sherman County's voters cast ballots for Trump last November, and Wyden hasn't carried the county of about 2,000 people since 2004. Yet the small town hall gathering stood out for its civility, compared with the raucous crowds faced recently by other members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans. Meeting with a small group of Democrats, Republicans and independents in Wasco, Wyden talked at length about health care, trade and democracy. While some pressed Wyden, they waited to be called on and thanked him for coming. Charlie Hogue, 71, asked a question that went to the heart of Democratic concerns that leaders aren't pushing back hard enough against Trump. 'I thought we had checks and balances in this country, and I'm beginning to lose hope because the current administration ignores court orders,' he said. 'So are the Democrats planning to just message for the next elections … or do you have a plan?' Wyden cited examples of how he had challenged Trump: a recent trip to Canada, where the senator spoke with the prime minister about trade, and discussions with Oregon wheat farmers about tariffs. T.L. Fassbender, 76, wondered why it seems that Democrats support immigrants who entered the country illegally. Wyden responded that he believed the immigration system was 'broken' and noted that a bipartisan border bill collapsed in the Senate last year after then-candidate Trump came out against it. In the ensuing exchange, Fassbender said he didn't think Wyden had answered his question, so the senator tried again. 'If somebody has committed a crime, for example, I don't think that should be something that is protected as part of legislation,' Wyden said. 'What's been going on, unfortunately, is we have some government agencies coming and swooping up people who've done nothing wrong.' When immigration came up again later, Wyden noted that his parents were fleeing Nazi Germany when they came to the United States. 'I believe that legal immigration makes our country better and stronger,' he said. Pursuing the Epstein records Recently, Wyden has emerged as a leading Democratic voice in pressing for more information on the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case. He isn't new to the effort, which has become a political crisis for Trump. The president's supporters are angry that his administration didn't keep promises to release records from the investigation into the wealthy financier's exploitation of underage girls for sex. The Justice Department and FBI recently said there was no Epstein 'client list,' walking back a notion that the administration had previously promoted. As the top Democrat on the powerful Senate Finance Committee, Wyden had been pressing for Epstein's financial records long before the scandal resurfaced. 'We spent three years following the money,' he told the AP after the Wasco town hall. 'And we're going to stay at it until the facts come out.' Wyden said Democrats agonizing over low voter morale and party strategy should hold more meetings in conservative areas, where they might learn something from the people they represent. 'The old saying is, 'most of life is just showing up,'' he said. 'But it's especially important in government because there is a sense that this is rigged.'
CBS News
20 minutes ago
- CBS News
Pa. state lawmakers push to launch study to turn Penn State Fayette into military college
Lawmakers in Pennsylvania want to launch a study to potentially turn the Penn State Fayette County campus into a senior military college. Republican State Representative Charity Grimm Krupa represents the region and is the elected official proposing the study. Rep. Grimm Krupa said the goal is to make use of the facility after Penn State announced the closure of the branch campus. She said that no plans are currently being drawn up until lawmakers are convinced that it would benefit the community and the students. "My understanding is that there are only six military colleges across the nation, and there's no reason that Pennsylvania can't be home of one of those, and make it ultra successful," Rep. Grimm Krupa said. "I want to make sure that before we invest any taxpayer dollars in this, that it's a good idea and can be successful." A member of the Penn State Fayette advisory board said that there have been no discussions about turning the campus into a military facility. They are, however, pushing for the campus to be owned and operated by Fayette County. The campus is set to close in 2027.
