The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Is Trump Administration Confrontation with Harvard Due to a Mistake?
An interesting report that suggests some internal disagreement over how to handle higher education.
Last week, the Trump Administration sent a letter to Harvard University threatening serious consequences were the University not to adopt a broad series of reforms including (but not limited to) changes in hiring and admissions. Unlike some other universities, Harvard stood its ground and announced it would not comply. Now it appears someone in the Trump Administration may have acted prematurely in sending the letter in the midst of negotiations between the two sides.
According to a New York Times report the letter may have been sent in error.
The April 11 letter from the White House's task force on antisemitism, this official told Harvard, should not have been sent and was "unauthorized," two people familiar with the matter said.
The letter was sent by the acting general counsel of the Department of Health and Human Services, Sean Keveney, according to three other people, who were briefed on the matter. Mr. Keveney is a member of the antisemitism task force.
It is unclear what prompted the letter to be sent last Friday. Its content was authentic, the three people said, but there were differing accounts inside the administration of how it had been mishandled. Some people at the White House believed it had been sent prematurely, according to the three people, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about internal discussions. Others in the administration thought it had been meant to be circulated among the task force members rather than sent to Harvard.
But its timing was consequential. The letter arrived when Harvard officials believed they could still avert a confrontation with President Trump. Over the previous two weeks, Harvard and the task force had engaged in a dialogue. But the letter's demands were so extreme that Harvard concluded that a deal would ultimately be impossible.
Once the letter was sent, however, Harvard felt the need to respond to the official demands, leading to the current confrontation in which the Trump Administration is threatening to cut off all federal money to the university and to reconsider its tax-exempt status (a legally questionable move, as Eugene discusses here).
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The only evidence the letter was sent by mistake is statements from the Trump administration. So there is no credible evidence it was sent by mistake.
Well, the Trump administration's well earned reputation for incompetence and internal leaks are compelling circumstantial evidence.
Either way, it's overall a good thing since Harvard held firm and the Trump admin blinked.
You both exaggerate the competence of any government administration or department. Inefficiency and incompetence are the rule, not the exception. Letters get misset all the time. They just don't usually feed into a juicy journalistic narrative, though.
It's perhaps apochryphal to attribute the quote to Napolean but it's nevertheless a good rule of thumb, especially when dealing with government - never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.
Molly Kay’s out why there is pretty strong evidence this started as malice and this is just a lie.
But even if you don’t wanna buy that look where this situation is now.
Hard to deny that malice is at the wheel currently.
It hit the front pages a week ago and they somehow didn’t say it was a mistake until six days later. Explain.
And of course, there's Trump himself this week:
Where malice leads, malice follows.
Odd that they only discovered their "mistake" after Harvard fought back.
Odd indeed. But when an entire administration is peopled by hostile juveniles, playing childish games should be expected
"I meant to do that!"
It was certainly a mistake by the Trump administration to provide such a strong factual link between punitive financial measures and blatantly unconstitutional conditions.
Well look at how they dealt with the State of Maine.
H&HS initially stopped some of its funding.
Then Justice did.
ED still hasn't yet.
I think the correct response to this is to be glad that one side appears to be softening its position (or has lost some internal support). Ben Jonson claimed that his verse addressed to the 'Court Pucelle' fell out of his pocket at table when an aristocrat 'drank him drowsy.'
Heisenberg's uncertainty: the attempt to inquire into the event with sufficient scrutiny to know if this was actually the case would lose the window of opportunity. Make the peace, and leave the rest to the historians (who very much need the work).
Mr. D.
All the shenanigans to date have probably cost Harvard hundreds of millions of dollars. I wouldn't let it be
"Oh, shit, I just hit SEND. I meant to hit DELETE."
There is zero chance a letter signed by three officials, on official letter head, sent from an official e-mail address and not immediately retracted was a mistake. Harvard geared up for a fight and Trump backed down.
Right. It was no mistake. It was a lengthy and detailed set of requirements, almost giving the government control over admissions, hiring, and student discipline.
Interesting that it bans favoritism in admissions or hiring for certain groups, but mandates it in the interests of "viewpoint diversity." I guess too many idiot MAGAt's got rejected.
The letter also says they shouldn't admit international students who are "hostile to American values or institutions inscribed in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence."
Really? Say that you don't think the Electoral College is a good idea and you're out?
What assholes these people are.
Yup. Had this in a comment to EV's Harvard post earlier. Seems even more relevant here
Harvard pointed out that letter was signed by three top officials who were authorized to send it, previously promised to send it, had it printed on official letterhead, signed it, and sent it.
And in reaction to Harvard's response, the Trump administration threatened first to withdraw $2.7 billion in already committed research funding, and then to order the IRS to withdraw the public university's tax-exempt status.
So, it's now the White House’s position that it was malpractice by Harvard to not realize that this letter was so outrageous, its demands so extreme, that it just couldn't be true? Ummm...OK.
Yeah, right. Cite the NYT.
So, don't cite the OP's entire topic? Ummm...OK.
(For those without NYT subscriptions, including me, I linked to a free source linking to and directly quoting the NYT article.)
No, but Harvard's confrontation with the Trump administration is a mistake. Ask Columbia.
Sure. All victims should just keep quiet and know their place
That is the fascist way.
Weird because that's what Harvard and Columbia told their jewish students.
Columbia isn’t Harvard.
No federal money to any school for any reason.
Mistake or no, the battle against antisemitism at Harvard is joined.
Come off it. No one thinks this is about combating antisemitism.
That you feel the need to lie shows you know this is wrong and needs some moral cover.
What a terrible example you set.
Yes, no matter how it happened, Trump's decision to confront Harvard was a mistake. As Trump will shortly learn. Or if Trump pushes harder, the nation will learn, to its dismay, at political cost to Trump so great that Trump will wish he had not incurred it.
Harvard will celebrate its 400th anniversary, 11 years hence, in fine fettle.
No matter how long Trump may last, his own fettle is destined to decline.
Trump's place in historical infamy is already assured. So well assured as to justify reserving extensive shelf space for the books to describe it in the stacks of Widener Library.