What the Trump administration’s battle with Harvard means for the future of democracy

In the first months of his second term, President Trump has attempted to make good on the many promises he made during his campaign; this is especially true in the field of higher education. Trump has weaponized the federal government in a multi-front assault on some of the nation's best-known and most prestigious universities, holding particular ire for America's oldest institution of higher learning: Harvard. However, through its resistance, Harvard has shown other universities—and potentially other parts of civil society —how to fight back. 

In his effort to roll back DEI policies, President Trump has made a great number of demands for universities, insisting that they abandon many of their DEI programs. In April, Harvard drew public attention when its president, Alan Garber, shared in a letter to faculty and students that the university would not submit to a list of demands, which included eliminating DEI programs, screening international students who are “supportive of terrorism or anti-Semitism,” and ensuring “viewpoint diversity” in its hiring. This focus on anti-Smitism is a pattern from President Trump, continuously attempting to label the left as anti-Semetic. In an article from The Atlantic, Yair Rosenberg states “in reality, Donald Trump and his allies have been using ‘anti-Semitism’ as a pretext to advance a radical agenda that has nothing to do with Jews at all—and that most American Jews do not support.” Harvard’s lawyers sent a formal rejection of the demands, putting $9 billion of federal funding at stake. Since mid-April, the Trump administration has frozen billions of dollars in federal research grants for Harvard, pointing to the university’s failure to address antisemitism. By publicly standing up to the Trump administration’s demands, Harvard served as an example for other universities and began a public feud with President Trump that has only become more intense in the past month. 

The conflict between Trump’s Department of Homeland Security and Harvard originally began to intensify when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanded that the school provide information on the “illegal and violent” activities of international students. Harvard responded, stating these requests were unlawful and that they were unwilling to fully comply with the government’s demands. On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security deemed Harvard’s response insufficient, revoking Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. As Forbes explains, the SEVP rules and certification process were intended to encourage schools to report when students could not maintain their required course load and remove fraudulent schools, not to be used as punishment when universities refuse to comply with unrelated demands by ending their ability to enroll international students. Without this SEVP certification, the university cannot enroll international students. Along with the announcement regarding international students, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated that Harvard created an unsafe environment that enabled harassment of Jewish students. With this announcement, DHS promotes the unsubstantiated claim that international students are unruly and disruptive. As the Harvard Crimson notes, the university even provided the DHS information regarding the disciplinary records of international students that shows “the rate at which international students engage in criminal activity or face disciplinary action is astonishingly low.” This fact supports the argument that the Trump administration launched a politically motivated attack against the university, putting at risk the education of thousands of international students.

On Thursday, May 22, it was publicly announced the Trump administration ended Harvard’s ability to enroll international students, which jeopardized the legal status of more than one in four students currently on Harvard’s campus. This news startled the nation, as the concept of the federal government demanding that a private university refuse to accept international students seemed like a clear assault on American democracy. Harvard quickly responded, suing the administration less than a day later. The university coupled its complaint with a motion to temporarily block the government move, pointing to the chaos the government’s action had produced within the university. A judge quickly agreed with Harvard, freezing the administration’s move to halt international enrollment until the hearing.

Many legal experts seem to think Harvard will come out on top, with retired professor of immigration law at Cornell University Stephen Yale-Loehr telling Newsweek, “I think Harvard will win its lawsuit on both procedural and substantive grounds.” Yet, the precarious situation puts many international students in a difficult situation, raising concerns about their ability to complete their Harvard education with their visa status seemingly revoked. Other educational institutions have demonstrated their solidarity such as the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, who shared that in the wake of this news, all Harvard students—including graduates, postgraduates, and recently admitted students—would be welcome to study at their university.

Many are pointing to the Harvard case as an indicator of greater political conflict. Laura Meckler, of the Washington Post, expands on this, saying, “What this is really is a war, not just on Harvard, but on higher education more broadly… Today, it's [higher education] viewed as a place where conservative thought is not welcomed, where they are elite and looking down their nose at everybody else in the country and that the Republican Party, especially Donald Trump, has tapped into that.”

This notion of higher education becoming a symbol of liberal indoctrination is a crucial element of the Harvard conflict. President Trump, despite his Ivy League education, has branded himself as relatable to the working-class American, including many Americans who view private universities, particularly Ivy League institutions, as elite and unwelcoming to conservative viewpoints. The conservative push against these institutions is one of countless examples of how the political leaders on the right seek to create fear and promote misinformation in order to get their agenda passed. Higher education should not be a political pawn that can be manipulated by the federal government. Higher education has long been something America prides itself on, yet like many things in our current political climate, even our best universities are being turned into political playgrounds for elites to employ as part of a larger fight.

Harvard’s open defiance of the Trump administration is pushing other universities to follow suit. Columbia University, after initially attempting to strike a deal with the administration, has recently adopted a more defiant position, following the Harvard news, with the university’s president sharing that she followed the Harvard situation with great interest. There are few universities in the world with as much power and influence as Harvard. This is why Harvard is the perfect place to lead higher education in defying the demands of the Trump administration. Harvard’s position of power and Trump’s willingness to launch direct attacks at the university also speak to the brazenly authoritarian nature of the current administration. There is an unbridled sense of power and authority present in Trump’s second term, which was not nearly as prevalent in his first term.

The Harvard case serves as a powerful reminder that it is possible to stand up to the federal government. This past year has seen a version of President Trump that is more aggressive and dangerous than anything we have seen in his first term. With this, or in many ways enabling this, has been a disappointing number of individuals, companies, and institutions refusing to stand up to the president’s demands. Harvard provides an example of an institution that has a lot to lose by going against the administration, particularly with regard to funding, yet is standing up to Trump nonetheless. Americans everywhere should follow the Harvard situation closely, as a win for Harvard would be a win for the ideas of free speech and democracy, which are meant to be pillars on which this country is built on.

DomesticNatalie WikeComment