Can Trump Yank Harvard's Remaining Federal Funding?
Trump is wielding the state against a school whose politics he doesn't like.

For weeks, the Trump administration has been waging a war against Harvard University, releasing a series of conflicting demands, suggesting pulling the school's tax-exempt status, and barring the school from taking international students. Now, the administration is attempting to pull all remaining federal contracts from the university.
In a letter released on Tuesday, the General Services Administration directed all federal agencies that have contracts with Harvard to consider dropping their affiliation with the school, citing nebulous claims of racial discrimination and antisemitism.
"In light of this deeply troubling pattern, each agency should consider its contracts with Harvard University and determine whether Harvard and its services efficiently promote the priorities of the agency," the letter reads. "We recommend that your agency terminate for convenience each contract that it determines has failed to meet its standards, and transition to a new vendor those contracts that could be better serviced by an alternative counterparty. Going forward, we also encourage your agency to seek alternative vendors for future services where you had previously considered Harvard."
This move is just the latest in a series of attempts to wield the federal government to punish Harvard. In April, several federal agencies sent the school a demand letter paradoxically ordering the school to make all hiring and admissions decisions based upon pure merit, but also demanding that the school increase ideological diversity. When the school announced its intentions to defy the letter, the Trump administration pulled billions in federal funding and suggested that the IRS would also revoke the school's tax-exempt status. Last week, Homeland Security officials informed Harvard that it would be barred from taking international students. On Wednesday, the State Department announced that it would be temporarily halting visa interviews for all prospective international students pending a new procedure to scrutinize students' social media posts.
Can the government unilaterally pull funding for Harvard? The answer is probably no. While Harvard isn't entitled to receive federal funding, that doesn't give the government latitude to withdraw funding whenever it feels like it, for whatever reason.
According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment group, there's a fairly complex, multi-step process required for the government to pull federal funding from a school over discrimination claims. First, the Education Department has to conduct an investigation, and if the investigation finds discrimination, it has to work with the school to fix those issues. If the school is still noncompliant, the government has to give notice to the school and allow the school to challenge the government's decision at an administrative hearing.
"Those are a lot of steps, but they're important," reads a Friday press release from FIRE. "They protect students by making sure colleges live up to their obligations. And they protect colleges by making sure they have an opportunity to contest the allegations as well as a chance to make things right. These rules are also important because they provide a safeguard against political bias, risk of error, and governmental overreach."
While Trump is trying as hard as he can to quash Harvard—and setting an authoritarian precedent in so doing—there's some hope that the school can demand due process in court.
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
Trump should do everything on his power to keep Harvard from ever getting another dime from American taxpayers. In fact, he should look for any legal pretext to seize their entire endowment too,
But, the true libertarians say they have a right to taxpayer money!
Trump's wrath is focused on four Harvard grads who have thwarted his will to power: John Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Caleb Strong
and Rufus King .
Spoken like a true fascist.
...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...
Guess what John, Elbridge, Caleb & Rufus pitched in to write.
Now if only we could get Trump to yank the Federal funding for every other university in America I could really get behind him on that. But, of course, he's not doing this for any principle like the Constitution for example. He's doing this out of personal animosity. Not only that, but his bluster tends to flag after a while when he gets distracted by new emotions, so we can't even count on his actually yanking Harvard's funding. Alas ...
Yea let's give away America's technical primacy to the Chinese who would never apply state funding to science and technology.
Cool your jets, we are talking about Harvard not MIT.
But, OMG! Who will educate the next generation of NGO/CIA operatives and liberal Supreme Court justices?
MIT is where half of Harvard's last four presidents were educated.
So China will steal American university LGBTQ ideology and use it to further erode American society.
There's a reason they come to america for this and dont just do it at home.
Researchers LOVE having government literally spy on every single they do on AND off the clock.
Trump is about to force Chinese students to return to China. He is creating the worst brain drain the US or any country has or will ever see.
You say the dumbest shit.
Oh dear. China won't be able to steal info from the US. Sounds just tragic.
Lester - is it your assumption that America's technical primacy is possible only with tax funding? Is it possible that your sort of ridiculous thought processes (if what you do can be called a thought process) is a direct result of American tax-funded education and research? If so, you're a good example of why the government should stop funding education and research.
Ahh yes. The usual leftist drivel of implied animus.
I did not imply animus - I came right out and said it. And Trump did not imply animus - HE came right out and said it, too!
Harvard has definitely fallen from America's grace. It no longer produces those who contribute to American society , instead it has helped create tension, distrust and in some ways turned Americans against each other.
LBGTQ isn't just an ideology, it's a weapon being used to further fragment social cohesion and instigate chaos and distorted facts in favor of delusion.
A former Russian official warned America of what was to come if they ignored the signs.
So yes, yank any further federal funds form that and every other university that is involved with DEI, trans or any other nonsense.
Mike Benz was stating how Harvard has been part of the IC and deep state since the 60s. Look who hired all the ex Biden officials like Samantha Powers. Harvard did.
Powers was a Harvard professor before joining the State Department and becoming UN Ambassador.
She founded the Kennedy School's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy.
America THRIVES on tension. Americans have been turning on each other for generations and we're stronger, wealthier and more free now than at any time in world history. Would I like to see Harvard fund itself without any tax money? Of course! Would I like to see the propagandists stop trying to produce socialist robots with no critical thinking skills? Yes again! Would I prefer a world where the propagandists are convicted of crimes and banned from speaking? Not on your life!
The real problem is that every institution pushing DEI CRT and all that wokism is violating the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act. They are racist by their own definition.
Why has this been allowed to go on so long? And it ain't just Biden and Obama letting them fester. Trump didn't move against them his first term. I'm glad he's fighting it now, but there's better ways to do it. This way just smacks of revenge, and liable to disappear the next shiny thing catches his attention.
This way just smacks of revenge, and liable to disappear the next shiny thing catches his attention.
Still better than Reason's "Don't believe your racist colorblind eyes, skin color is the most important thing."/"I'm not advancing a paradox! *You're* advancing a paradox!" defense of it.
Always funny to me watching people like STG complain about cutting fed funds. They would rather rail against actually cutting funds and hating on Trump more than they would ever be fore cutting funds. Yet they will still claim yo want the latter.
Weak willed virtue signaling.
Yup, Trump is perfect. Stay the course, Jesse, never admit Trump could do better, that's the road to success.
You’re retarded enough to get a gig at this shitty webzine.
Pushing DEI, CRT and wokism is not in any way a violation of the 14th Amendment or the Civil Rights Act. Most of the Civil Rights Act is itself a violation of the Constitutional limits on Federal authority. Most of the federal tax and deficit spending is, itself, a violation of the Constitutional limits on Federal authority, too. Let's not get carried away and overstate the case here.
Meh. The tit ain't producing. 123% Debt to GDP, got to start cutting spending.
In April, several federal agencies sent the school a demand letter paradoxically ordering the school to make all hiring and admissions decisions based upon pure merit, but also demanding that the school increase ideological diversity.
If all the abjectly retarded editors at Reason don't have the first clue what "merit" means or what a paradox is and Reason hires just one person who does, they've simultaneously hired on merit *and* increased intellectual/ideological diversity. Aren't you the side that considered diversity to be an inherent or unbridled good?
You. dishonest. fucking. retard.
conflicting demands
Your cite doesn't reference any conflict or explain how any demands conflicted with each other. Even your citation's citations don't. Just that Harvard considered the demands extreme and the mistake of sending the letter spoiled the negotiations.
This is as bad as sarcasmic's wallowing in his own stupidity, "How can the Left support abortion and oppose capital punishment and the Right oppose abortion and support capital punishment?" shit show.
Aren't you the side that considered diversity to be an inherent or unbridled good?
paradoxically ordering the school to make all hiring and admissions decisions based upon pure merit, but also demanding that the school increase ideological diversity
Setting aside the fact that the word "pure" doesn't appear anywhere in the letter and it, like a normally structured document would, prioritizes various forms of merit over diversity while still demanding diversity... this is the part where Emma is essentially defending the idea that Harvard can't possibly simultaneously hire on merit *and* diversity (in response to a/the demand that they hire on merit first).
JFC, this magazine... just terrible.
>>Trump is wielding the state against a school whose politics he doesn't like.
on your federal tax paying behalf you're welcome.
And, tax dollars aside;
Administration: Hire on merit first. Then, if you must, hire on diversity, but not fake, superficial diversity like post-modern/Marxist 32-genders-and-238-different-skin-colors-of-non-colonizers. Real "I disagree with what you say, but defend to the death your right to say it." ideological diversity.
Harvard/Reason: WTF are you talking about? If we accept and hire people based on merit, all of our diversity departments and social equity metrics will tank!
ya I lol'd at dishonest fucking retard. I don't go that far but I laugh when you do
Remember when the feds were bullying schools into politically correct ideology literally just one year ago? ANd had been for decades?
Ah, but if you mention that, Jesse thinks you're anti-Trump. Shhhh!
Libertarians for tax funded cultural Marxism!
After Nixon won, Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, ostensibly intended as a bipartisan crash course school for freshman Representatives, turned into a bat cave where out of office Democratic pols hang from the rafters twittering at each other until the Beltway turns blue again.
You can wonder in and out of it for years without running into a Republican , let alone a Jackson or Moynihan Democrat.
Moynihan was a Harvard Professor.
Who chaired its Institute of Politics Seminar on the Coevolution of British and American Conservatism years before being elected to the Senate. As he died before Reagan did , I don't see your point.
Fuck Harvard.
Gee, aren't Libertarians against taxpayer funding of private colleges? Thought maybe the headline might be something like "Trump rightly wants to pull remaining taxpayer funding from Harvard, but he might not be able to legally" ... oh, right, most of Reason is anti-Trump.
What does libertarianism have to do with Reason?
We're against taxpayer funding of private colleges but only if you yank the funding in the politically approved way after decades of funding those private colleges in violation of the Constitution but in the politically approved way of violating the Constitution! All clear now?
Just as America prospered for 114 years without benefit of Prohibition, Harvard did without a DEI office for 384.
Whether it can redress the ethnic cleansing suffered by its traditional minority groups: Puritans, Brahmins & Beautiful People, in time for its 400th anniversary remains to be discovered.
Harvard engaged in blatant discrimination for most of its history. It fired its first President because he didn't believe in infant baptism. For over a century it was about promoting Puritan religious intolerance. Then it discriminated against Catholic immigrants. And Blacks. And Jews. And it took until 1976 to stop discriminating against women. It needed a DEI office long before it created one.
It is now discriminating against Jews.
Apparently DEI did not fix the problem.
I would be OK with them ceasing to exist.
DEI is prima facie racist. Harvard needs more racism??
In the big picture.....
Can Trump stop the [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] Indoctrination Camps for Kids from STEALING from everyone?????
I find it amazing the very 'federal funding' stance sits directly on some imaginary Right-to-STEAL.
What's funny is that this war on foreign students and American universities is going to destroy the US tech industry (and reindustrialization). Fortunately, US university administrators will be the first to lose their jobs. But tech hiring and start up pipeline is next
This move is just the latest in a series of attempts to wield the federal government to punish Harvard.
Curiously missing from your article, is ONE SINGLE REASON why Harvard shouldn't be punished. Or, for that matter, even a single reason why they deserve any funding at all.
Curious curious curious omission.
there's some hope that the school can demand due process in court.
"We're OWED our entitlements," said the ugly girl in the clown nose wearing a libertarian skinsuit.
Yeah, that is the most baffling thing from this gaggle of libertarians.
The lame Koch brother sure loves sucking off the government.
Re:
"Curiously missing from your article, is ONE SINGLE REASON why Harvard shouldn't be punished."
Harvard remains presumptively innocent until proven guilty in a court of law .
If you wish to avoid conviction an idiot in the court of public opinion, you are at liberty to withdraw your statement.
Harvard has been caught red-handed discriminating, plagiarizing, antagonizing, persecuting, and sheltering criminals. Harvard staff members have already resigned over this acknowledging full admission that's what was going on.
And your response is, "Nah, didn't happen. Not until a criminal court says it did." Using the term "presumptive innocence," like an absolute ignorant moron who doesn't even appreciate how retarded ignorant he is, not even realizing that there ARE NO criminal charges in play here.
Gol-lee, I can't even with you retards sometimes.
Now you're going to do one of two things - fire back a reply in an impotent rage trying to prove that your crotch still has something between it, or you'll walk away without replying having the marks of a 2x4 embedded in your face.
Pick the smart one and take your licks, eunuch.
Current score:
SCOTUS 1 Harvard 0
Wanna bet which way this goes?
Civil rights law is sometimes used well.
Current score
Bill of Rights 1
AT O
Reason 1:
"This move is just the latest in a series of attempts to wield the federal government to punish Harvard.
AT 0:
"there ARE NO criminal charges in play here."
What criminal charges have been filed, moron? Who at Harvard is looking at potential jail time?
I'll wait.
1. Congress creates a new cabinet-level Department of Education in violation of the Constitutional limits on Federal authority.
2. The Department of Education starts regulating educational activities it has no constitutional authority to regulate, including complex, controversial social issues.
3. Congress passes uncountable spending authorizations and the Department of Education spends billions of dollars on education including grants to private educational institutions without constitutional authority.
4. The President refuses to spend money that was authorized in violation of the Constitution under laws and regulations in violation of the Constitution and all hell breaks loose because he is not yanking the unconstitutional funds in the politically approved unconstitutional manner. I would be willing to fight a civil war to restore the Constitution of the United States of America but
Gotta love pseudo-libertarians.