Latest news with #PaulaM.Stannard
Time of India
01-08-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Harvard's antisemitism case heads to Justice Department: Will the federal probe change student life at elite colleges?
Harvard faces DOJ referral in antisemitism probe, raising questions about student life and campus policies. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has officially referred its antisemitism investigation of Harvard University to the Department of Justice (DOJ), marking a major escalation in the federal government's scrutiny of campus discrimination. With billions in research funding already suspended and political pressure mounting, the move could have far-reaching effects not just on Harvard, but on how elite institutions across the country approach free speech, campus climate, and student life. The referral was first reported by The Harvard Crimson , which obtained a two-page letter sent by HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Director Paula M. Stannard to Harvard President Alan M. Garber. In it, the agency accused the university of 'deliberate indifference' to campus antisemitism and declared that efforts to reach a voluntary resolution had failed. From campus complaints to federal courtroom? The referral to the DOJ opens the door to legal action against Harvard for alleged violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination at federally funded institutions. While the Justice Department is not required to act on the referral, it could pursue court-enforced remedies — including a consent decree that mandates changes to Harvard's policies, student conduct codes, and academic programming. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 3/4 BHK Flats ₹1.65 Cr onwards Honer Signatis Book Now Undo This development raises a critical question for students and educators alike: If the government intervenes more aggressively in university governance, how will that reshape life on campus? Student tension builds amid legal uncertainty According to The Harvard Crimson , tensions have been building on campus for months as federal investigations have unfolded. Student groups have voiced concerns about rising antisemitism and Islamophobia, while others have warned against political interference in academic freedom. The latest federal move could intensify that atmosphere, particularly if the DOJ enforces changes that affect protest rights, faculty hiring, or disciplinary policies. Some students worry that Harvard's resistance to a deal with the government may prolong uncertainty and place additional pressure on the university's administration. What about free speech and academic freedom? At the heart of the controversy lies a broader debate: Where should the line be drawn between protecting students from hate and preserving free speech in academic spaces? Federal officials argue that Harvard failed to adequately respond to antisemitic harassment, creating a hostile environment for Jewish students. But in court filings, Harvard has pushed back, claiming the Title VI violation notice was 'premature' and politically motivated. The university insists that the administration did not conduct a full investigation before reaching its conclusion. As elite colleges grapple with heated protests and global conflicts spilling into campus dialogue, especially on topics like Israel-Palestine, the question of how to regulate speech without stifling it has become more urgent than ever. A warning signal to other top universities? Harvard is not alone. Columbia University recently resolved its own Title VI probe by settling with the Trump administration. That agreement included a $200 million payment and a series of conditions that touched on student discipline, foreign student screening, and oversight of Middle East studies programs. The Columbia precedent suggests that elite schools may now be expected to accept greater federal oversight in exchange for continued access to research funding, a development that could shape how administrators, faculty, and students navigate identity politics and activism on campus. What students should expect next The DOJ has not confirmed whether it will act on the referral, and the timeline for any legal proceedings remains uncertain. However, even the possibility of court-enforced intervention has prompted concern across academic circles. If Harvard is forced to adopt new conduct policies or academic frameworks under federal mandate, students could experience changes in how protests are regulated, how identity-based discrimination is addressed, and how coursework is evaluated for potential bias or political influence. A turning point in higher education? The outcome of the Harvard case could redefine the federal government's role in higher education, especially when civil rights and campus culture collide. For now, students across elite universities are watching closely, not just to see what happens to Harvard, but to understand how their own campuses might change in the months to come. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
New York Post
09-07-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Trump ramps up fight with Harvard with threat to its accreditation, potentially jeopardizing its student aid
The Trump administration has ratcheted up its battle with Harvard University, with federal agencies telling the New England Commission of Higher Education that the Ivy League institution may no longer meet accreditation standards due to violations of federal antidiscrimination laws. The Department of Education and Department of Health and Human Services penned a letter to NECHE Wednesday, saying it must work with the Ivy League to remedy violations or strip the 388-year-old school of its accreditation. 'Harvard has been — and is — deliberately indifferent to the severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive harassment of Jewish and Israeli students by its own students and faculty,' HHS Office of Civil Rights Director Paula M. Stannard said in the letter. Advertisement Federal agencies under President Trump have written to Harvard University's accreditor, saying it should lose its status due to violations of federal antidiscrimination laws. AFP via Getty Images 'By allowing antisemitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus, Harvard University has failed in its obligation to students, educators, and American taxpayers,' said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. In addition to signaling that an institution of higher learning meets certain quality and integrity standards, accreditation 'is required for institutions to receive federal financial aid, including student loans and grants,' according to NECHE. Advertisement 'When an institution — no matter how prestigious — abandons its mission and fails to protect its students, it forfeits the legitimacy that accreditation is designed to uphold,' HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said. The missive follows a shot across the bow fired last month by Trump's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, which warned Harvard president Alan Garber that the university was in violation of federal civil rights laws over campus antisemitism and that its federal funding was at risk. 'Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard's relationship with the federal government,' the June 30 letter said. The letter was accompanied by a 57-page report by HHS detailing its findings resulting from 50 'listening sessions' held with Jewish Harvard students, which the agency alleges constitutes a 'pattern of unlawful and unchecked discrimination' at the university. Advertisement After the letter was sent, the Commission put out a fact sheet explaining how the accreditation process works, noting that the federal government cannot actually force it to withdraw a university's accreditation. 'The Commission's policies and procedures, in accord with federal regulation, give institutions up to four years to come into compliance when found by the Commission to be out of compliance, which can be extended for good cause. Institutions in a non-compliance status remain accredited during this period of time,' The Hill reported. The Cambridge, Mass.-based Ivy League has been engaged in a monthslong battle with Trump over antisemitism on campus. IBRESTER – In a statement to The Post, a Harvard spokesman said the university has 'taken substantive, proactive steps to address the root causes of antisemitism in its community,' highlighting the sharing of its recent Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias Report, as well as 'strengthened policies, disciplined those who violate them, encouraged civil discourse, and promoted open, respectful dialogue,' the statement read. Advertisement 'Harvard has made significant strides to combat bigotry, hate and bias. We are not alone in confronting this challenge and recognize that this work is ongoing. ' Last month, the DOE sent a similar letter to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, an accrediting institution that Columbia University belongs to, saying it, too, should lose its accreditation over its failure to contain antisemitism on its campus in Manhattan's Morningside Heights neighborhood. The Trump administration also slapped Harvard with a subpoena Wednesday as part of its probe into the school's foreign student exchange program — with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claiming the institution has 'allowed foreign students to abuse their visa privileges and advocate for violence and terrorism on campus.' Trump had said he wants to curtail its admission of international students, which the Wall Street Journal estimates could cost the school $90 million a year in lost tuition. A federal judge issued a temporary injunction on the ban last month, which the administration has vowed to appeal. The administration has also yanked some $3.2 billion in federal contracts and grants from Harvard, and pulled around $700 million in federal research funds.
Fox News
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
New Title IX investigation opened in Minnesota after trans pitcher wins girls' softball championship
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has launched a Title IX investigation into the state of Minnesota after a transgender pitcher led Champlin Park High School to a state championship earlier this month. HHS announced the investigation on Thursday, directly citing the controversial softball situation. "The male athlete's participation was instrumental, leading the team to win the state title," the announcement read. HHS's Office of Civil Rights Paula M. Stannard insisted that the state must follow federal law, and not its current state laws that permit trans inclusion in girls' sports. "Females cannot be relegated to the sidelines under Title IX," Stannard said in the announcement. "As a recipient of Federal funds, Title IX requires Minnesota to ensure fair and safe opportunities for females to compete on sex-segregated teams – regardless of state law obligations." The state is already under investigation by the U.S. Department of Education for its state laws that allow biological males in girls' sports and defy President Donald Trump's "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports" executive order. That investigation was elevated to the federal Title IX investigation team, which operates in conjunction with the Department of Justice, on June 12. The state is also engaged in a pair of lawsuits over the issue, one filed by state Attorney General Keith Ellison against the Trump administration, and another filed by three anonymous girls softball players against Ellison and the state over having to compete with a trans athlete. The state also failed to pass a bill that would have barred biological males from girls' and women's sports in early March after Democrats in the state's legislature voted against it. This allowed the trans pitcher, junior Marissa Rothenberger, to have a dominant playoff run for Champlin Park. Rothenberger threw a complete-game shutout, allowing just three hits and striking out six in the championship game Friday, capping off a run that saw Rothenberger pitch all 21 innings across three state tournament games, giving up just two runs. The organization representing the plaintiffs suing the state over its policies, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), previously provided a statement from one of the female players about her experience facing the trans athlete. "Hitting against him is not only a physical challenge but a mental, too. It's a mental battle knowing that he has an advantage in the sport that I grew up playing, making it hard to even want to hit against him. His ability to get outs and spin the ball is a strong advantage, but like I said, it's also incredibly mentally challenging knowing that you're competing against someone who has unfair advantages leaving you with little to no confidence," the player said. "This issue has affected me in ways that I never imagined. It's simply unfair, and I hate that nothing is happening to change that. Boys should not be able to take girls' spots on teams just because they are capable of doing so. I hope that more girls affected by this issue will stand up against this." The anonymous player also called out Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison for aggressively defending trans inclusion in girls' sports in the state. Ellison has filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump and the U.S. Department of Justice over Trump's "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports" executive order. "It's really upsetting to know that [Ellison] isn't taking rights of girls and women seriously. He is allowing boys to compete with girls, and it is not safe and completely unfair. To know that AG Ellison is in complete support of letting boys and men take advantage of females in sports is absolutely disgusting and wrong," the player added. Champlin Park's school district provided a statement to Fox News Digital defending the decision to allow the athlete to compete on the softball team. "Throughout the entire season, and as the Rebels advance to the state tournament, it is important to note that all of the student athletes participating for the Champlin Park Softball team are eligible to compete in compliance with Minnesota State High School League rules and applicable state law. Due to data privacy laws, the District is not able to provide public comment regarding a specific student athlete," a statement from the Anoka-Hennepin School District stated. "In addition, the District is named in an active lawsuit which limits what information can be shared." Ellison's office previously released a statement responding to the lawsuit against the state over Rothenberger's participation in the girls' softball season. "In addition to getting exercise and the fun of competition, playing sports comes with so many benefits for young people. You build friendships that can last a lifetime, you learn how to work as part of a team, and you get to feel like you belong," Ellison said. "I believe it is wrong to single out one group of students, who already face higher levels of bullying and harassment, and tell these kids they cannot be on the team because of who they are. I will continue to defend the rights of all students to play sports with their friends and peers." Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
The Hill
20-06-2025
- Health
- The Hill
HHS investigating Michigan healthcare system over alleged conscience rights violation
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is investigating whether an employee at a Michigan hospital system was fired for refusing to use a patient's preferred pronouns and assisting in 'sex trait modification' procedures, the agency's Office of Civil Rights announced Friday. The healthcare worker allegedly requested religious accommodations from certain employment practices like using a patient's preferred pronoun even if they do not match with their sex and from helping with 'certain sex trait modification procedures,' according to a press release from HHS. An HHS spokesperson has yet to respond to questions from The Hill on the name of the health care system under investigation. If the employee was fired for this reason, the press release states, the termination was a violation of federal conscience laws. The investigation will look into whether the health system has policies that align with federal conscience laws, also known as Church Amendments, that seek to accommodate healthcare workers with religious beliefs that conflict with certain healthcare procedures. The investigation will also examine the specific circumstances related to the healthcare workers' firing. 'OCR is committed to enforcing Federal conscience laws in health care,' said Paula M. Stannard, OCR Director. 'Health care workers should be able to practice both their professions and their faith.' This is the third investigation regarding conscience rights in health care the department has launched since President Trump returned to office in late January. 'Today's announcement is part of a larger effort to strengthen enforcement of laws protecting conscience and religious exercise,' the agency said in a statement.
