The Trump administration is initiating a review of approximately $100 million in federal funding to Harvard University, intensifying a longstanding conflict characterized by allegations of discrimination and a freeze on grants.
Trump Administration Targets Harvard Funding in Ongoing Dispute
Trump Administration Targets Harvard Funding in Ongoing Dispute
Federal review to potentially redirect $100 million in grants amidst accusations of discrimination and antisemitism.
The Trump administration will direct US federal agencies to review Harvard University's grants to potentially end or reallocate funding, as part of the White House's escalating conflict with America’s oldest university. The Government Services Administration (GSA) is set to circulate a letter to agencies asking them to identify whether contracts with Harvard should be "cancelled or redirected elsewhere," according to a senior White House official. The administration estimates that around 30 contracts, collectively valued at $100 million, could be reviewed. Previously, the administration froze $2.65 billion in federal grants and attempted to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll international students.
In response to the situation, Harvard University has not yet commented. However, it emphasizes on its website that its pioneering research in areas such as cancer and infectious diseases has long relied on federal funding. The university warns that without such financial support, ongoing groundbreaking studies may be halted mid-project.
While the White House is not set to revoke the funds immediately, it will commence an appraisal of the federal money Harvard receives to determine if the funding is deemed crucial. The GSA will advise each agency to "terminate for convenience each contract that it determines has failed to meet its standards" and to consider reallocating these funds elsewhere. The draft letter that will be sent out accuses Harvard of engaging in discrimination and antisemitism, which has elicited backlash from students and faculty at the institution.
On Tuesday evening, students gathered to criticize the administration's actions. Jacob Miller, a student and former head of Harvard Hillel, labeled the administration's rationale as "absurd." An administration official later clarified to BBC News that potential funding cuts would not impact hospitals associated with Harvard. Agencies could, however, advocate for preserving any federal grants perceived as critical.
This growing political and financial impasse between the White House and Harvard has escalated dramatically over recent months. Past efforts by the administration to hinder Harvard's funding include threats to its tax-exempt status and a freeze on substantial federal grants, which resulted in a lawsuit against the administration. Furthermore, an attempt to revoke the university's ability to enroll international students led to confusion among thousands of affected students, culminating in another legal challenge.
Harvard's president, Alan Garber, expressed dismay prior to the recent announcement, highlighting the critical role research funding plays not only for the university but for the nation as a whole. He emphasized that research funding is essential for conducting vital work designated as a high priority by the federal government.
One research hub affected by funding cuts is the Sinclair Lab at Harvard Medical School, known for its work on aging and associated diseases. Lab founder David Sinclair commented that loss of funding disrupts ongoing experiments and jeopardizes the contributions from vital international scholars. The repercussions of the administration's actions are anticipated to have a severely negative impact on graduate and PhD students relying on external funding for their research endeavors. Adam Nguyen, a Harvard alumnus, remarked that potential funding cuts would result in layoffs and immediate stoppages in research projects.
The situation remains fluid, with international students at Harvard facing uncertainty, particularly after the temporary halt of the administration's plans to block their enrollment. The larger conflict continues to draw scrutiny and criticism from various stakeholders within and beyond the university.
In response to the situation, Harvard University has not yet commented. However, it emphasizes on its website that its pioneering research in areas such as cancer and infectious diseases has long relied on federal funding. The university warns that without such financial support, ongoing groundbreaking studies may be halted mid-project.
While the White House is not set to revoke the funds immediately, it will commence an appraisal of the federal money Harvard receives to determine if the funding is deemed crucial. The GSA will advise each agency to "terminate for convenience each contract that it determines has failed to meet its standards" and to consider reallocating these funds elsewhere. The draft letter that will be sent out accuses Harvard of engaging in discrimination and antisemitism, which has elicited backlash from students and faculty at the institution.
On Tuesday evening, students gathered to criticize the administration's actions. Jacob Miller, a student and former head of Harvard Hillel, labeled the administration's rationale as "absurd." An administration official later clarified to BBC News that potential funding cuts would not impact hospitals associated with Harvard. Agencies could, however, advocate for preserving any federal grants perceived as critical.
This growing political and financial impasse between the White House and Harvard has escalated dramatically over recent months. Past efforts by the administration to hinder Harvard's funding include threats to its tax-exempt status and a freeze on substantial federal grants, which resulted in a lawsuit against the administration. Furthermore, an attempt to revoke the university's ability to enroll international students led to confusion among thousands of affected students, culminating in another legal challenge.
Harvard's president, Alan Garber, expressed dismay prior to the recent announcement, highlighting the critical role research funding plays not only for the university but for the nation as a whole. He emphasized that research funding is essential for conducting vital work designated as a high priority by the federal government.
One research hub affected by funding cuts is the Sinclair Lab at Harvard Medical School, known for its work on aging and associated diseases. Lab founder David Sinclair commented that loss of funding disrupts ongoing experiments and jeopardizes the contributions from vital international scholars. The repercussions of the administration's actions are anticipated to have a severely negative impact on graduate and PhD students relying on external funding for their research endeavors. Adam Nguyen, a Harvard alumnus, remarked that potential funding cuts would result in layoffs and immediate stoppages in research projects.
The situation remains fluid, with international students at Harvard facing uncertainty, particularly after the temporary halt of the administration's plans to block their enrollment. The larger conflict continues to draw scrutiny and criticism from various stakeholders within and beyond the university.
