Trump administration unlawfully cut Harvard’s funding, US judge rules

Harvard litigated the grant funding case alongside the school’s faculty chapter of the American Association of University Professors. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 04 September 2025
Follow

Trump administration unlawfully cut Harvard’s funding, US judge rules

  • US judge rules that Trump’s actions violated Harvard’s free-speech rights

BOSTON:  A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that US President Donald Trump’s administration unlawfully terminated about $2.2 billion in grants awarded to Harvard University and can no longer cut off research funding to the prestigious Ivy League school. The decision by US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston marked a major legal victory for Harvard as it seeks to cut a deal that could bring an end to the White House’s multi-front conflict with the nation’s oldest and richest university.
The Cambridge, Massachusetts-based school became a central focus of the administration’s broad campaign to leverage federal funding to force change at US universities, which Trump says are gripped by antisemitic and “radical left” ideologies.
Among the earliest actions the administration took against Harvard was to cancel hundreds of grants awarded to university researchers on the grounds that the school failed to do enough to address harassment of Jewish students on its campus.
Harvard sued, arguing the Trump administration was retaliating against it in violation of its free-speech rights after it refused to meet officials’ demands that it cede control over who it hires and who it teaches.
Burroughs, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, said the Republican president was right to combat antisemitism and that Harvard was “wrong to tolerate hateful behavior as long as it did.”
But she said fighting antisemitism was not the administration’s true aim and that officials wanted to pressure Harvard to accede to its demands in violation of its free-speech rights under the US Constitution’s First Amendment.
Burroughs said it was the job of courts to safeguard academic freedom and “ensure that important research is not improperly subjected to arbitrary and procedurally infirm grant terminations, even if doing so risks the wrath of a government committed to its agenda no matter the cost.”
She barred the administration from terminating or freezing any additional federal funding to Harvard and blocked it from continuing to withhold payment on existing grants or refusing to award new funding to the school in the future.
White House spokesperson Liz Huston in a statement called Burroughs an “activist Obama-appointed judge” and said Harvard “does not have a constitutional right to taxpayer dollars and remains ineligible for grants in the future.”
“We will immediately move to appeal this egregious decision, and we are confident we will ultimately prevail in our efforts to hold Harvard accountable,” she said.
Harvard did not respond to requests for comment.
The decision came a week after Trump during an August 26 cabinet meeting renewed his call for Harvard to settle with the administration and pay “nothing less than $500 million,” saying the school had “been very bad.” Three other Ivy League schools have made deals with the administration, including Columbia University, which in July agreed to pay $220 million to restore federal research money that had been denied because of allegations the university allowed antisemitism to fester on campus.
As with Columbia, the Trump administration took actions against Harvard related to the pro-Palestinian protest movement that roiled its campus and other universities in the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and Israel’s war in Gaza. Harvard has said it has taken steps to ensure its campus is welcoming to Jewish and Israeli students, who it acknowledges experienced “vicious and reprehensible” treatment following the onset of Israel’s war in Gaza. The administration’s decision to cancel grants was one of many actions it has taken against Harvard. It has also sought to bar international students from attending the school; threatened Harvard’s accreditation status; and opened the door to cutting off more funds by finding it violated federal civil rights law. Burroughs in a separate case has already barred the administration from halting Harvard’s ability to host international students, who comprise about a quarter of the school’s student body.
Harvard litigated the grant funding case alongside the school’s faculty chapter of the American Association of University Professors, which has voiced opposition to the idea of the institution cutting a deal with Trump.
“We hope this decision makes clear to Harvard’s administration that bargaining the Harvard community’s rights in a compromise with the government is unacceptable,” the group’s lawyers, Joseph Sellers and Corey Stoughton, said in a statement.

 


Ukraine accuses Hungary, Slovakia of ‘blackmail’ over threats to cut electricity

Updated 3 sec ago
Follow

Ukraine accuses Hungary, Slovakia of ‘blackmail’ over threats to cut electricity

KYIV: Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry condemned what it described as “ultimatums and blackmail” by the governments of Hungary and Slovakia on Saturday, after they threatened to stop electricity supplies to ​Ukraine unless Kyiv restarts flows of Russian oil.
Shipments of Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia have been cut off since January 27, when Kyiv says a Russian drone strike hit pipeline equipment in Western Ukraine. Slovakia and Hungary say Ukraine is to blame for the prolonged outage.
Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico said on Saturday that he would cut off emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine within two days unless Kyiv resumes Russian oil transit to Slovakia over Ukraine’s ‌territory. Hungary’s Viktor ‌Orban made a similar threat days earlier.
The issue ​has ‌become ⁠one of ​the ⁠angriest disputes yet between Ukraine and two neighbors that are members of the EU and NATO but whose leaders have bucked the largely pro-Ukrainian consensus in Europe to cultivate warm ties with Moscow.
Slovakia and Hungary are the only two EU countries that still rely on significant amounts of Russian oil shipped via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline over Ukraine.
“Ukraine rejects and condemns the ultimatums and blackmail by the ⁠governments of Hungary and the Slovak Republic regarding energy supplies ‌between our countries,” the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said ‌in a statement. “Ultimatums should be sent to the Kremlin, ​and certainly not to Kyiv.”

HUNGARY, ‌SLOVAKIA ARE KEY FOR UKRAINE’S ELECTRICITY IMPORTS
Between them, Hungary and Slovakia ‌have been providing around half of European emergency electricity exports to Ukraine, which Kyiv increasingly relies on as Russian attacks have damaged its grid.
“If oil supplies to Slovakia are not resumed on Monday, I will ask SEPS, the state-owned joint-stock company, to stop emergency electricity ‌supplies to Ukraine,” Fico said in a post on X.
Kyiv said that such actions were “provocative, irresponsible, and threaten the energy ⁠security of ⁠the entire region.”
Throughout the war that began with the full-scale Russian invasion whose fourth anniversary falls on Tuesday, Ukraine has allowed its territory to be used for Russian energy exports to Europe, which have been sharply curtailed but not halted.
Ukraine has proposed alternative transit routes to ship oil to Europe while emergency pipeline repair works are under way.
In a letter seen by Reuters, the Ukrainian mission to the EU proposed shipments through Ukraine’s oil transportation system or a maritime route, potentially including the Odesa-Brody pipeline linking Ukraine’s main Black Sea port to the EU.
Since October last year, Russia has intensified its drone and ​missile attacks on the Ukrainian ​energy system, knocking out electricity and heat and plunging millions of Ukrainians into long blackouts during bitterly cold winter temperatures.