Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
The Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism has announced a funding freeze on $2.2 billion of federal multi-year grants and a $60 million contract with Harvard University after the college announced it would not comply with the government's demands for reform.
On April 11th officials from the General Services Administration, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education issued a letter to university president Dr. Alan Garber and Penny Pritzker, Senior Fellow of the Harvard Corporation, indicating that federal funding will be contingent upon governance and disciplinary reforms, overhauling programs with "egregious records of anti-semitism and other bias," screening to ensure that international students accepted would not engage in activities contrary to American values, merit-based hiring and admissions, along with proactive measures to foster intellectual diversity. The letter included an outline of auditing procedures for monitoring the efforts and protections for whistleblowers to safely report compliance failures.
"The United States has invested in Harvard University’s operations because of the value to the country of scholarly discovery and academic excellence. But an investment is not an entitlement. It depends on Harvard upholding federal civil rights laws, and it only makes sense if Harvard fosters the kind of environment that produces intellectual creativity and scholarly rigor, both of which are antithetical to ideological capture," the authors said.
Harvard's response, penned by lawyers William Burck and Robert Hur, was issued on Monday.
Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural, policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.
The university's lawyers defended Harvard's efforts over the past 15 months to undertake "substantial policy and programmatic measures" to discipline disruptive students, stimulate ideological openness, and engender civil discourse. "As a result, Harvard is in a very different place today from where it was a year ago," the response reads.
The letter accuses the task force of ignoring the success of these efforts and called the administration's efforts illegal.
The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle.The letter concluded that Harvard would be open to further dialogue with the administration.
Within hours, the announcement was made that Harvard's funding would come to a halt.
"Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges – that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws," read the official statement of the joint task force.
This morning, President Trump upped the ante on Truth Social:
Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting “Sickness?” Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!This post was promoted to the Main Feed by an editor.
Discussion (10)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Like much of the academic community, Harvard has declined in both the quality of its instruction and the quality of its student body. The DEI/Affirmative Action admissions, the denial of Asian students admissions, and the fact that they have admitted to having to offer remedial instruction to freshmen who have entered with submarginal skills are all factors that speak to Harvard's inability or unwillingness "to continue to make, lasting and robust structural, policy, and programmatic changes". The anti-Semitic demonstrations that were allowed to continue through much of last year that kept students from attending classes, and, in many cases. to safely transit the campus clearly demonstrated this.
My suspicion is that given its enormous endowment they think that they can wait out the remain three plus years of the Trump administration and work for a more friendly one to come to office. Making changes more permanent through congressional action, as with much of the current Trump agenda, must be achieved to make the real effect felt. The arrogance of Leftist Academia is enormous and needs to be swatted down. Removing the taxfree status of organizations which have political agendas like schools and Public radio and television is a long overdue need.
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
You're right. Congress should pass a law making it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
There seems to be some sort of law in place. Public spaces like supermarkets or lunch counters can't restrict entrance on the basis of race.
Where exactly is it legal to discriminate on the basis of race, and where is it not?
CONTRIBUTOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Newsflash, Harvard. If you're taking federal $$$ you're not independent.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Harvard was doing so against Asian students who applied for entry. It was illegal, but they did it anyway and used absurd racial stereotypes to justify the choices. They continue to accept DEI students into their freshman class over whites far more qualified. That is racial discrimination which is illegal, but, again, they invent nonsense excuses for their admissions choices. If you have ever applied for position in a public service, as I did many years ago at the Seattle Aquarium, and a minority person with far fewer qualifications is chosen instead of you you rapidly learn that, though it is illegal, it continues to be done and will continue until real teeth are put in the law.
You're seeing five of ten comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.