Harvard will not acquiesce to mandates from the Trump administration

On Monday, Harvard dismissed the demands from the Trump administration which jeopardize $9 billion in research funding, asserting that the government’s proposals surpass its legal jurisdiction and violate both the University’s autonomy and its constitutional freedoms.

“The University will not forfeit its autonomy or abandon its constitutional freedoms,” Harvard President Alan Garber expressed in a communication to the community. He went on to say: “No government — irrespective of which party is in control — should determine what private universities are allowed to teach, whom they can admit and employ, and which fields of study and research they can pursue.”

Garber’s statement was a reply to a correspondence received late Friday from the Trump administration outlining stipulations that Harvard would have to meet in order to sustain its funding association with the federal government. These stipulations encompass “audits” of various academic programs and departments, as well as the perspectives of students, faculty, and staff, alongside alterations to the University’s governance framework and hiring practices.

The $9 billion currently under scrutiny by the government comprises $256 million in research assistance for Harvard in addition to $8.7 billion in future obligations to the University and several prestigious hospitals, including Mass General, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Boston Children’s.

The Trump administration has critiqued Harvard’s management of student demonstrations following the Oct. 7 assault by Hamas on Israel and Israel’s incursion into Gaza. It has accused the University of not adequately safeguarding Jewish students on campus from antisemitic discrimination and harassment, thereby violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Garber highlighted that Harvard remains dedicated to combating antisemitism, outlining a series of campus initiatives undertaken during the past 15 months. Furthermore, he remarked that the University has adhered to the Supreme Court ruling that eliminated race-conscious admissions and has endeavored to expand intellectual and viewpoint diversity at Harvard.

“The University’s mission in combating antisemitism will not be fulfilled through assertions of power, disconnected from the law, to regulate education and learning at Harvard and dictate our operational procedures,” Garber stated. “The efforts to resolve our deficiencies, meet our commitments, and represent our values are ours to define and carry out as a community.”

Harvard is merely one of numerous institutions targeted by the Trump administration in recent weeks. Last month, the Department of Education sent notices to 60 universities, including Columbia, Northwestern, the University of Michigan, and Tufts, threatening law enforcement actions for failing to comply with anti-discrimination laws established in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The administration has also taken the added measure of freezing research funding at several campuses.

Dynamic research and innovation collaborations among educational institutions, the federal government, and private enterprises trace back to World War II. Research financed by the government conducted at universities nationwide has resulted in countless breakthroughs, inventions, medical treatments, and other progress that have influenced the contemporary world. Computers, robotics, artificial intelligence, vaccines, and therapies for severe diseases have all emerged from government-supported research that bridges from laboratories and libraries into the commercial sector, generating new products, companies, and employment.

In March, a study by the nonprofit United for Medical Research revealed that each dollar of research funded by the National Institutes of Health — the leading funder of biomedical research in the nation — produces $2.56 in economic activity. In 2024 alone, the NIH granted $36.9 billion in research funding, generating $94.5 billion in economic activity and supporting 408,000 jobs, according to the study.

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 concerning the longstanding partnership between the U.S. government and higher education, stated that withdrawing research funding from universities would be “disastrous” for American innovation.

“Universities play such a crucial role in the current U.S. innovation framework that it would collapse without them,” remarked Gross, who previously taught at Harvard Business School before relocating to Duke.

George Q. Daley, dean of Harvard Medical School, indicated that biomedicine has historically relied on a robust partnership with the federal government, yielding significant dividends for Americans in groundbreaking advancements. Just this month, he pointed out, the Medical School’s Joel Habener was acknowledged with a Breakthrough Prize for his research on GLP-1, which has contributed to drugs for diabetes and obesity. Daley also referenced transformative endeavors in cardiovascular health, cancer immunotherapy, and various other conditions.

“Reflecting over the 70 years of that collaboration, it has yielded remarkable returns on the investments made by the government,” he stated. “The presence of Harvard, MIT, and these outstanding hospitals has attracted venture capital investment, and now we see the pharmaceutical research infrastructure being integrated into our community. All of this stands as a jewel in the crown of American bioscience.”

The jeopardy facing that science is an even greater concern in a time of heightened competition with China, he added.

“It appears counterproductive and detrimental to the economy and to U.S. leadership in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals,” Daley declared. “It seems as though the hammer has fallen in a manner that endangers something essential to U.S. leadership and ultimately to our competitive edge against nations like China, which are heavily investing in biotechnology.”

In his address to the community, Garber underscored the vital contributions of university research to scientific and medical advancements while emphasizing the necessity of independent thought and scholarship.

“The freedom of thought and inquiry, along with the government’s enduring commitment to uphold and protect it, has enabled universities to contribute significantly to a free society and to improved, more prosperous lives for individuals everywhere,” he asserted. “We all have a stake in preserving that freedom.”