The Trump administration is set to sever its remaining ties with Harvard University, a move that could cost the institution an estimated $100 million in federal contracts. This decision, announced on May 27, 2025, comes amid ongoing tensions between the administration and the Ivy League school over allegations of antisemitism and liberal bias on campus.
According to a letter from the General Services Administration (GSA) obtained by The New York Times, federal agencies have been instructed to review their contracts with Harvard and consider canceling or redirecting them to alternative vendors. The GSA's federal acquisition service commissioner, Josh Gruenbaum, stated that the agency is assisting all federal agencies in this review, and a report on their actions is due by June 6, 2025.
President Donald Trump has been vocal about his disdain for Harvard, labeling it as “very antisemitic” in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social. He threatened to divert $3 billion in grant money from Harvard to trade schools, emphasizing his administration’s commitment to what he perceives as a necessary fight against liberal bias in higher education.
These actions are part of a broader strategy by the Trump administration to undermine Harvard’s financial health and influence. Since April 2025, the administration has frozen approximately $3.2 billion in grants and contracts with the university. The move to cut ties is seen as an escalation in a months-long standoff over Harvard’s policies regarding antisemitism and its admissions practices.
Harvard has responded by launching legal actions against the Trump administration, arguing that these measures represent an attempt to control academic decision-making. The university’s president, Alan M. Garber, condemned the administration's actions as unlawful and warned that they threaten the futures of thousands of students. "We condemn this unlawful and unwarranted action," Garber stated, highlighting the potential impact on the university's ability to enroll international students, who constitute about 27 percent of its total enrollment.
In a significant legal development, a federal judge recently issued an injunction that temporarily reinstated Harvard’s right to enroll international students, following the administration’s announcement to revoke that permission. A hearing is scheduled for May 29, 2025, to determine whether the injunction will be extended.
Beyond the immediate implications for Harvard, the Trump administration's actions reflect a broader ideological battle over education in America. Critics argue that the administration is using its power to punish institutions that do not align with its political agenda. The GSA letter accused Harvard of a “disturbing lack of concern for the safety and wellbeing of Jewish students” and cited instances of alleged racial discrimination in its admissions processes.
Harvard's legal team contends that the administration's claims lack merit and are politically motivated. In one lawsuit, the university seeks the restoration of the frozen funds, while in another, it challenges the legality of the administration's attempts to dictate its admissions policies and academic standards.
As the situation unfolds, members of Congress are also facing heightened scrutiny from constituents during town halls. Several lawmakers, including Reps. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), are returning to their districts for recess, where they are likely to encounter contentious discussions regarding the Trump administration's policies. Town halls have seen increased tension, particularly among Republican lawmakers, who have been advised to avoid in-person events due to the backlash against government decisions.
In another development, Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino announced on May 26, 2025, that the bureau will allocate more resources to several investigations tied to the Biden administration, including the discovery of a bag of cocaine at the White House and the investigation into pipe bombs found near the Democratic and Republican Party headquarters on January 6, 2021. Bongino emphasized that these cases have garnered public interest and are essential for restoring trust in the federal government.
Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also weighed in on the ongoing legislative agenda, asserting that there are “enough” Republicans to halt the current GOP agenda bill, which is projected to add $2.3 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade. Johnson criticized the bill's spending, framing it as a burden on future generations.
The Trump administration's aggressive stance against Harvard has drawn attention not only for its implications for the university but also for its potential impact on higher education across the country. As the administration seeks to reshape the landscape of academic freedom and funding, the ramifications of these actions may extend far beyond Harvard's campus.
In a broader context, the administration's approach to education reflects a growing divide in American society regarding issues of race, academic freedom, and the role of government in higher education. As debates continue over the future of federal funding and the autonomy of educational institutions, Harvard's challenges may serve as a bellwether for other universities facing similar pressures.
As the deadline for agencies to report on their contracts with Harvard approaches, the university's leadership remains steadfast in its commitment to defend its academic integrity and the rights of its students. The outcome of this confrontation could set significant precedents for the relationship between the federal government and institutions of higher learning in the United States.
