Seizing Harvard's Federal Funds
Plus: Nanny surveillance, Apple stock price responds to tariff threats, Boeing settlement, and more...
Huge cuts: According to a letter that will officially be released later today, from the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to federal agencies, Harvard University's remaining federal grants and contracts (worth roughly $100 million) will be cut. This is in addition to the $3.2 billion worth of frozen grants and contracts.
"Examples of contracts that would be affected, according to a federal database, include a $49,858 National Institutes of Health contract to investigate the effects of coffee drinking and a $25,800 Homeland Security Department contract for senior executive training," reports The New York Times.
"Being a counterparty with the federal government comes with the deep responsibility and commitment to abide by all federal laws and ensure the safeguarding of taxpayer money," reads the letter. "As fiduciaries to the taxpayer, the government has a duty to ensure that procurement dollars are directed to vendors and contractors who promote and champion principles of nondiscrimination and the national interest."
Reason Roundup inline form
The Reason Roundup Newsletter by Liz Wolfe Liz and Reason help you make sense of the day's news every morning.
"GSA understands that Harvard continues to engage in race discrimination, including in its admissions process and in other areas of student life.…Harvard is suspected of engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment in hiring, promotion, compensation, and other personnel related actions." Harvard will, of course, push back in court; it's already filed suit in an attempt to restore $3 billion in federal funds. But the Trump administration keeps antagonizing it, also pushing forward a plan to begin to tax its endowment.
Pulling federal funds from universities will undoubtedly save the taxpayer money, and with endowments like these, was it really important for taxpayers to subsidize these schools in the first place?
Still, the Trump administration hasn't exactly gone about this in a detached, principled way: It has, at times, decided to fight an ideological battle, such as with investigations into the school's handling of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel protests on campus.
Foreign students also a target: The president has also, of late, decided he has a real issue with international students, which comprise nearly 30 percent of Harvard's student body: "Why isn't Harvard saying that almost 31% of their students are from FOREIGN LANDS, and yet those countries, some not at all friendly to the United States, pay NOTHING toward their student's education, nor do they ever intend to," he wrote on Truth Social. "Nobody told us that! We want to know who those foreign students are, a reasonable request since we give Harvard BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, but Harvard isn't exactly forthcoming. We want those names and countries. Harvard has $52,000,000, use it, and stop asking for the Federal Government to continue GRANTING money to you!"
This broadside comes "comes two days after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the administration from being able to revoke the university's ability to enroll international students," per NPR. ("This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus," said Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem when announcing on May 22 that DHS would be revoking its ability to enroll foreign students—an aggressive overreach of state power.)
Contra the president's Truth Social post, foreign governments aren't obligated to pay for their citizens' educations abroad, and these students who come to the U.S. are, in fact, paying tuition to the institutions that are educating them. American universities have historically been a means of spreading soft power abroad and inculcating our values. American companies hiring foreigners post-graduation creates brain drain, which helps us maintain a competitive advantage. (Of course, there's an espionage risk when students and workers are poorly vetted—an issue that has cropped up, oddly, time and time again in New York City politics. But that risk can and should be mitigated.)
It's classic Trump administration: It's all a mixed bag, where the taxpayer might be saved some money, and a longstanding government function might be no longer, but there's a hefty side of xenophobia and government overreach that renders it all a lot less palatable. A more neutral approach based on restoring federal funds to their proper role, not punishing disfavored institutions, would be better (and possibly more likely to hold up in court).
Scenes from New York: A parenting universe that has lost any sense of perspective: "Spying, snitching, AirTagging toddlers … A Nanny Diaries–style Facebook group is a breeding ground for paranoid Upper East Side moms." More from Air Mail.
QUICK HITS
- Beautiful tribute:
I have the privilege of knowing many Gold Star families, to carry the memories of their loved ones on my wrist and in my heart throughout the year. I flew back to the U.S. today from Poland, where we saw the sites of the worst humanity has to offer— Treblinka, Mejdanek,… pic.twitter.com/NXYtu47yiH
— Mary Katharine Ham (@mkhammer) May 27, 2025
- "The Justice Department has reached a deal with Boeing that will allow the airplane giant to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading U.S. regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before two of the planes crashed and killed 346 people, according to court papers filed Friday," reports the Associated Press. Under the agreement, which is not final yet, "Boeing would pay or invest more than $1.1 billion, including an additional $445 million for the crash victims' families, the Justice Department said. In return, the department has agreed to dismiss the fraud charge against Boeing, allowing the manufacturer to avoid a possible criminal conviction that could have jeopardized the company's status as a federal contractor, according to experts."
- "Apple Inc. shares are coming off their longest selloff in more than three years, as escalating attacks from the White House threaten to further erode the company's profit outlook, suggesting the stock's struggles this year are far from over," reports Bloomberg. "President Donald Trump on Friday threatened to levy a 25% tariff on the company's products if it doesn't shift iPhone production to the US. Shares fell 3% to end the week, their eighth straight negative session, the longest such selloff since January 2022."
- Yes:
Isn't the point of a credit score measuring how reliably the scored person pays his debts? https://t.co/IZM5vIEzBC
— Charles Fain Lehman (@CharlesFLehman) May 27, 2025
