JUDGE QUESTIONS LEGAL BASIS
Judge Burroughs expressed scepticism over the government’s assertion that it could cancel grants on broad policy grounds without a formal process.
“That’s a major stumbling block for me,” she said, adding that if funding could be cut over issues related to speech, the constitutional consequences would be “staggering.”
Burroughs, an Obama appointee, has already barred the administration from ending Harvard’s ability to host international students in a separate case. She is expected to issue a written ruling in the funding case in the coming weeks.
GOVERNANCE DEMANDS SPARKED CONFLICT
The administration’s push to defund Harvard followed its refusal to comply with demands issued in an April 11 letter by a White House task force. The letter called for sweeping changes including governance restructuring, revised admissions and hiring practices to ensure ideological diversity, and the termination of select academic programmes.
Harvard has said the demands overstepped legitimate concerns about antisemitism and aimed instead to control academic speech, in violation of First Amendment protections.
University President Alan Garber said the cuts could cost the school nearly US$1 billion annually, forcing layoffs and hiring freezes. The amount includes the cancelled multi-year federal research grants.
TAX PENALTIES ADDED TO PRESSURE
As part of Trump’s spending and tax legislation, the Republican-led Congress also raised the federal excise tax on Harvard’s US$53 billion endowment income from 1.4 per cent to 8 per cent. Endowment income accounts for 40 per cent of Harvard’s operating budget.
Garber said the school has taken steps to support Jewish and Israeli students who faced “vicious and reprehensible” treatment following the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas in October 2023.
But he maintained that the administration’s measures extended far beyond the issue of antisemitism and amounted to unconstitutional interference in Harvard’s academic independence.
