Obama Is a Huge Hypocrite for Praising Harvard's Anti-Trump Stance
Harvard's law faculty previously criticized the Obama administration's assault on norms of free speech and due process.

Earlier this week, former President Barack Obama applauded Harvard University for standing up to the Trump administration. Unlike Columbia University, which has swiftly fallen in line and agreed to implement various policies demanded by President Donald Trump in exchange for the restoration of $400 million in federal grants, Harvard is prepared to fight back.
"We have informed the administration through our legal counsel that we will not accept their proposed agreement," said Harvard President Alan Garber. "The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights."
You are reading Free Media from Robby Soave and Reason. Get more of Robby's on-the-media, disinformation, and free speech coverage.
The Trump administration had demanded changes to university curriculum, the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) provisions, the prevention of masked protesting, and other changes ostensibly aimed at countering antisemitism on campus. Opponents of these policies, civil libertarians and free speech groups among them, counter that the federal government's threat to withhold funding is a violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights.
"How Harvard governs its academic programs, and who should have a say in that governance, is up to Harvard, not the federal government," writes the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. "The First Amendment and basic principles of academic freedom require no less."
FIRE also warns that this will likely not be the last time the federal government tries to extort a private institution and that "opposing the government's unconstitutional demands" is the only path forward. Similarly, Obama praised Harvard for setting "an example for other higher-ed institutions."
Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions – rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom, while taking concrete steps to make sure all students at Harvard can benefit from an environment of intellectual inquiry, rigorous debate and… https://t.co/gAu9UUqgjF
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) April 15, 2025
Obama clearly believes the Trump administration's threat to deprive Harvard of billions in federal funding is wrong; he also seems to think that the federal government should not be in the business of harming the climate for free speech and academic freedom on campus. On both these fronts, he is engaged in profound hypocrisy.
As I explained previously, the Obama administration carried out the exact same policy against not just a small number of elite educational institutions, but virtually every college and university in the country. Under Obama, the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights compelled schools that receive federal funding to change their sexual misconduct policies in ways that undermined basic due process protections for accused students and professors; these new policies also harmed free speech and academic freedom, as several professors who spoke out against the policies were subsequently accused of violating them. This was the perverse logic of Obama's approach to Title IX, the federal statute that outlaws sex discrimination in education: His federal bureaucrats created such a morass that campus administrators felt obligated to investigate professors for criticizing the Education Department.
Moreover, the Obama-era policies were stridently opposed by Harvard's law faculty. In October 2014, 28 Harvard law professors signed an open letter condemning the federal government's meddling and encouraging the university to resist tyranny via Title IX.
"The university's sexual harassment policy departs dramatically from these legal principles, jettisoning balance and fairness in the rush to appease certain federal administrative officials," wrote the professors. "We recognize that large amounts of federal funding may ultimately be at stake. But Harvard University is positioned as well as any academic institution in the country to stand up for principle in the face of funding threats."
The signatories included Elizabeth Bartholet, a well-known professor of civil rights and family law, and Charles Ogletree, who has actually been described as a mentor to the Obamas when they were students at Harvard. In separate commentary, Bartholet described the government's position as "madness" and said that Harvard should be ashamed of itself for caving.
"I believe that history will demonstrate the federal government's position to be wrong, that our society will look back on this time as a moment of madness, and that Harvard University will be deeply shamed at the role it played in simply caving to the government's position," she told The Wall Street Journal.
It's a good thing that Harvard has found its spine, now that the president is Trump instead of Obama. But it's risible for Obama to complain at present about an "unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom." He should look in the mirror.
This Week on Free Media
I am joined by Amber Duke to discuss Stephen A. Smith potentially running for president, Taylor Lorenz's commentary on Luigi Mangione, and the Dave Smith/Douglas Murray debate on Joe Rogan's show.
Worth Reading
Having read Agatha Christie's entire Hercule Poirot catalog last year, I had moved on to the more recent Poirot novels written by Sophie Hannah, with permission from Christie's estate. But I have now completed those as well, and the next one won't be published until later this year. And so I ask you, dear reader—what novel should I pick up next?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Putting conditions in a contract is now extortion.
Right.
Spin Doctors.
He's applying the asphalt over the still-wet concrete of "dictatorship".
It's the cargo-cult self-fulfilling prophecy. They tossed a virgin into the volcano and the eclipse ended, just like The Prophet said. Really, The Prophet is a hypocrite for not speaking up *before* everyone was terrified by the eclipse.
All I know is that withholding funds for valuable research would be awfully dumb.
He should open an Los Pollos Hermanos.
Odds are you’ll open a 40 of Colt 45 first.
And so I ask you, dear reader—what novel should I pick up next?
I don't know, maybe something with pro-freedom themes? And then pass it around among your staff.
Might I suggest "Stranger in a Strange Land" or "Starship Trooper" (the book, not the terrible movie) by Robert Heinlein. Some very libertarian ideas are discussed. The original Saint novels by Leslie Charteris are highly entertaining. Early Tom Clancy is good, particularly "Red Storm Rising." Susan Peretsky writes good mysteries, Leon Uris, Philip K. Dick and Anne Rice are excellent.
If he likes high fantasy (or mid fantasy, not sure what it would be classified as), The Sword of Truth series is great and has a heavy Objectivist lean to it (one of the later books in the series is basically The Fountainhead).
If you're going to suggest Heinlein, try "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress". Maybe he'll learn something about libertarianism.
Even better would be L. Neal Smith's "Probability Broach" series.
Too true. The "Handbook for Revolutionaries" ("The Moon is a Harsh Mistress") is a very libertarian novel, and very instructive. And predictive: with AI being worked out at break-neck speed, Mike is looking more plausible all the time.
Norm MacDonald: Now do you think Cosby's legacy will be hurt?
Jerry Seinfeld: Yeah.
Norm MacDonald: You do, huh? I mean, there's a comedian, Patton Oswalt, he told me, "I think the worst part of the Cosby thing was the hypocrisy." And I disagreed.
Jerry Seinfeld: You disagreed with that?
Norm MacDonald: Yeah, I thought it was the raping.
Obama Is a Huge Hypocrite
for Praising Harvard's Anti-Trump StanceRight on!
He’s a Progressive Democrat. Comes with the territory
Precisely why the Dept of Education should not exist.
Hillsdale figured this out long ago, and you don't hear anything about them complying with any administration!
^BINGO.....
What did anyone think was the real purpose of Commie-Indoctrination Camps for kids?
Yep!
It is a violation of your first amendment rights for me to not have my money taken by force and given to you.
Did you just return from your struggle session?
Trump is suppose to be dismantling National Indoctrination.
What's he doing making new deals?
That's my biggest disappointment in this article.
Everyone already knows Obama and the entire left love them some Commie-Indoctrination camps and are the masters of hypocrisy.
So, Harvard is consistent ? Good for them.
Consistently wrong.
No exactly the opposite. They caved to Obama, but now intend to stand up to Trump.
But Drive by Belle wouldn't be who she is without showing up to post exactly one idiotic post before disappearing to the next article.
Obama is a hypocrite? Who could have possibly have known this before voting for him.
Twice.
Of course he's a hypocrite, Robbie: Obama's a self-styled pragmatist, so the ends always justify the means. Lack of principle is a small sin when the Greater Good is at stake, and Obama's creepy followers were always ready to defend his virtue, no matter how stained it became.
From that perspective, he's an awful lot like Trump...
Obama is as big a lying fucker as you are.
There's one huge difference: Trump told everyone what he wanted, if not the exact details, and he's like a bulldog pursuing them, for better or worse.
Obama can be summed up by Candidate Obama promising to close Gitmo, making a weak half-hearted attempt on his first day, then backing off and never mentioning it again when a few Congress Critters said No.
Then for his piece de resistance, he and the Dem Senators gutted a House revenue bill, repopulated it with Obamacare in violation of the Constitution's requirement that all revenue bills start in the House, and passed it by reconciliation which bypassed House Republican objections. A truly brave and open endeavor which ended in Chief Justice Roberts calling the tax a penalty. Sorry if I have some of the details wrong, that was a while ago, and the stench hasn't subsided yet.
Biden can be summed up as bragging about ignoring the Supreme Court as far as "forgiving" student loans.
Trump can be summed up by pushing his damned border wall for four years, and every time the courts or Congress rebuffed him, he tried something different. He did not violate the Constitution, and he did not brag about ignoring the Supreme Court. This recent garbage about a court ordering him to order a foreign country into releasing their citizen from their prison to send him to the US as an illegal immigrant pales in comparison to all the unconstitutional crap pulled by Obama and Biden.
Obama's a 'pragmatist', Trump is unprincipled - it's (D)ifferent.
Except Obama actually undid DECADES of racial relations to protect himself politically.
Obama was horrendous.
"...the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) provisions, the prevention of masked protesting, and other changes ostensibly aimed at countering antisemitism on campus."
So the Trump Administration is demanding that Harvard give up racism, bigotry and antisemitism? And this is a violation of academic freedom? Good to know, I suppose.
Have they tried not letting antisemitism run rampant through their campus?
Also, why for the Nazi-in-Chief is demanding they fight antisemitism on campus?
I tuned out Stephen Smith when he said "I have no choice."
Just what the country needs, another damned puppet.
policies demanded by President Donald Trump in exchange for restoration of $400 million in federal grants, Harvard is prepared to fight back..."The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights."
Universities are fictitious entities and don't have constitutional rights. And few things say independence like leaching $400 million off the federal government.
Try reading Sherlock Holmes. If you don't want to read them in published order, don't waste your time on "chronological order" because they are even more confusing. Here's my recommendation for a good introduction series.
* Neither of these can be "solved", but they are good introductions, and if you take them slow, you can sort of figure out why he's taking various steps.
Norwood Builder
Bruce-Partington Plans
* You absolutely can solve this one. Put it down as soon as Holmes and Watson return to London. One clue practically rubs your nose in the general solution, and you will kick yourself when you realize how blindingly obvious it is if you don't stop and think about it at that point. Those first two should have given you the general theme of Sherlock Holmes stories.
Silver Blaze
* And just for fun, another one with nothing to solve, but plenty of steps which you can understand if you pay attention.
The Blue Carbuncle
Obama and Biden were two of the dumbest presidents in modern times. Bunch of mouth-breathers. At least Biden had the excuse that he was losing his mind and Jill was his puppet master.
I wonder if we can send Obama to El Salvador....oopsie...
Does he qualify as home grown? I'd like to see a birth certificate. But I hear Kenya is nice this time of year.
If not, there’s always Indonesia for Barry Soetoro.
droning Americans and running shadow wars in the middle east with a terrorist wing meh ... but the Harvard thing
Exactly. That piece of fucking shit is a walking affront to personal freedom. But he's friends with Jay Z, so swoooooon. I guarantee all of Reason's female staff and half of the males have thought about him while they masturbate.
Calling Obama a hypocrite is like calling the Pacific Ocean wet.
What to read? The Expanse series by James Corey. Great hard(ish) scifi. All of Brendon Sanderson's Cosmere books, ending with the Stormlight books.
Harvard's Kennedy School contributed mightily to Obama's ambitious social engineering agenda, and oversaw the invention of masters degrees in Misinformation, and the ethnic cleansing of social conservatives from the Faculty of Arts & Sciences at large.
"How Harvard governs its academic programs, and who should have a say in that governance, is up to Harvard, not the federal government," writes the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. "The First Amendment and basic principles of academic freedom require no less."
(snip)
As a libertarian, I wholeheartedly agree. As an American living in the real world, this is- of course- fanciful bullshit. If the First Amendment were really this absolute, the Civil Rights Act would be unenforceable. Title IX would be tossed to the curb. Discrimination would be completely legal as an expression of freedom of association.
Again, as a libertarian, do go on.
But let's be real. Contrary to FIRE's free speech absolutism, the Trump Administration has pretty solid footing in claiming that most of these requirements are justified under the Civil Rights Act, and Title IX. The only item I can see falling outside these rules is the masking prohibition.
But let's be real.
FIRE is a bunch of lawyers who know which side of their social justice toast is buttered, started their downhill slide as Kors made his way out, and jumped the shark when they switched from Education to Expression.
I thought the same. They've been captured. Once they were fighting for the little guy, the minority viewpoint that was being shouted down, now they're just using up the good will that was collected a decade ago to cover for the powerful.
In 2018, egged on by the Faculty, Harvard's politically monolithic administration terminated the University's founding charter without a peep from its Board of Overseers, effectively disenfranchising its alumni.
Five years later, it is reaping the whirlwind.
FYI, Robby, congrats on leaving libertarianism. When did you make that decision?
Obama Is a Neiman-Marxist Cunt for Praising Harvard's Anti-Trump Stance
FIFY
Obama clearly believes the Trump administration's threat to deprive Harvard of billions in federal funding is wrong;
The key to recognizing why Obama had no problem threatening the loss of federal funds to an ally is that despite your claim it was vigorously opposed by schools in fact the schools welcomed it. This was so schools could take their preferred action of eliminating due process and terrorizing political enemies while (1) protecting themselves from liability and (2) ensuring no other US Universities gained a competitive advantage by refusing to accept such an outrageous and clearly illegitimate policy.
For better understanding there are roughly 850,000 full time college professors in the US and ~115 law professors at Harvard, of which 28 signed a single letter in opposition. So lets just say this indicates something less than widespread "strident" opposition.
As usual the takeaway is that many fewer college professors will stand up for the rights of American citizens than foreigners, particularly those likely to run afoul of the current deportation standards because those foreigners are overwhelmingly their political allies. That's what this is about as you can tell by the orders of magnitude difference in outrage over the lack of due process.
And what is the ratio of full time lawyers to Superior Court judges ?
After I finished the Poirot series I read the Miss Marple series. Not quite as excellent as Poirot, but well worth the effort. Alternative suggestion, the Nero Wolfe series by Rex Stout, and the Charles Lenox series by Charles Finch.