Harvard will not acquiesce to requests from the Trump administration

On Monday, Harvard dismissed the Trump administration’s requests threatening $9 billion in research funding, arguing that the adjustments demanded by the government surpass its legal jurisdiction and infringe upon the University’s autonomy and constitutional rights.

“The University will not relinquish its independence or constitutional rights,” Harvard President Alan Garber stated in a statement to the community. He elaborated: “No government — irrespective of the political party in power — should determine what private universities can teach, which individuals they admit and hire, and the fields of study and inquiry they may pursue.”

Garber’s statement was a reply to a communication sent late Friday by the Trump administration outlining conditions that Harvard would need to meet to maintain its funding relationship with the federal government. These conditions encompass “audits” of academic programs and departments, as well as the feedback from students, faculty, and staff, and modifications to the University’s governance structure and employment practices.

The $9 billion currently under scrutiny by the government comprises $256 million in research support for Harvard plus $8.7 billion in future commitments to the University and several prestigious hospitals, including Mass General, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Boston Children’s. Late Monday, the Trump administration declared that it was proceeding to freeze $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts awarded to Harvard.

The Trump administration has criticized Harvard’s management of student protests relating to the Gaza conflict. It has alleged that the University has inadequately shielded Jewish students on campus from antisemitic discrimination and harassment, thus violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Garber stressed that Harvard is dedicated to combating antisemitism and outlined a series of campus initiatives that have been enacted over the past 15 months. Furthermore, he noted that the University has adhered to the Supreme Court ruling that ended race-conscious admissions and has strived to enhance intellectual and viewpoint diversity at Harvard.

The goals of the University in combating antisemitism will “not be fulfilled through assertions of authority, detached from the law, to control education and learning at Harvard and dictate how we function,” Garber said. “The responsibility of addressing our shortcomings, fulfilling our commitments, and embodying our values is ours to define and pursue as a community.”

Harvard stands as just one of numerous institutions targeted by the Trump administration in recent times. Last month, the Department of Education sent notifications to 60 universities, including Columbia, Northwestern, the University of Michigan, and Tufts, threatening enforcement measures for failing to comply with anti-discrimination statutes within the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The administration has also taken the additional action of freezing research funding at several institutions.

Strong research and innovation collaborations between universities, the federal government, and private sector trace back to World War II. Government-sponsored research performed at educational institutions nationwide has yielded numerous discoveries, inventions, treatments, and other advancements that have significantly influenced the modern world. Computers, robotics, artificial intelligence, vaccines, and remedies for life-threatening diseases have all originated from government-funded research that transitions from laboratories and libraries to industry, creating new products, companies, and jobs.

In March, a study from the nonprofit United for Medical Research revealed that every dollar invested in research by the National Institutes of Health — the largest backer of biomedical research in the nation — produces $2.56 in economic activity. In 2024 alone, the NIH allocated $36.9 billion in research grants, resulting in $94.5 billion in economic activity and supporting 408,000 jobs, according to the report.

In a conversation on Monday, Daniel P. Gross, an associate professor of business administration at Duke University and co-author of a recent NBER working paper on the decades-long collaboration between the U.S. government and higher education, remarked that the withdrawal of research funding from universities would be “devastating” for American innovation.

“Universities are such a vital component of the contemporary U.S. innovation system that it couldn’t exist without them,” expressed Gross, who previously taught at Harvard Business School before transitioning to Duke.

George Q. Daley, dean of Harvard Medical School, remarked that biomedicine has long relied on a robust collaboration with the federal government, which has resulted in life-saving innovations for Americans. Just this month, he pointed out, the Medical School’s Joel Habener was honored with a Breakthrough Prize for his contributions to GLP-1, which has facilitated the development of diabetes and weight-loss medications. Daley also referenced transformative initiatives in cardiovascular health, cancer immunotherapy, and a myriad of other conditions.

“Reflecting on the 70 years of that partnership, it has repaid abundantly on the investments made by the government,” he stated. “The presence of Harvard, MIT, and all these exceptional hospitals has attracted venture capital investments, and now we have the infrastructure for pharmaceutical research being integrated into our community. All of this represents a highlight in American bioscience.”

The jeopardy posed to that science constitutes a larger concern amid intensified competition with China, he added.

“It seems counterproductive and damaging to the economy as well as to U.S. leadership in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals,” Daley articulated. “It feels as though a decisive action has been taken that threatens something essential to U.S. leadership and ultimately to our economic competitiveness with nations like China, which are investing heavily in biotechnology.”

In his address to the community, Garber emphasized the significance of university research to scientific and medical advancement while reinforcing the necessity of independent thought and academic scholarship.

“Freedom of thought and inquiry, combined with the government’s enduring commitment to uphold and protect it, has allowed universities to contribute in essential ways to a free society and to healthier, more prosperous lives for individuals worldwide,” he stated. “All of us have a responsibility to safeguard that freedom.”