Trump was stern, loud, and brash,
For Harvard, he made a mad dash.
“End DEI” was his call,
But Alan stood firm through it all,
Now billions are frozen in the crash.

“Encouraging & Important”: Harvard Rejected Trump Takeover. Will Other Institutions Join the Fight?

Bonus Limerick:

In Harvard, a freeze caused dismay,
As dumb Trump pulled the funding away.
With demands to end DEI,
Smart Alan chose to defy,
Because with education, he doesn’t play.

Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2025

Trump, the Constitution and the machinery for change

Op-Ed: The Trump administration has frozen more than $2.2 billion in grants and contracts for Harvard University. This move followed Harvard’s rejection of the administration’s demands to end its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and implement other policy changes. As a prerequisite for receiving federal funding, the administration asked Harvard to alter its policies and sent the university a list of demands that included eliminating DEI programs, ensuring that its hiring practices incorporate “viewpoint diversity,” and screening international students for potential support of terrorism or antisemitism. Harvard stated that it would not comply, prompting the administration to announce the freeze of over $2.2 billion in grants and contracts.

In response to the freeze, Harvard referred to a letter President Alan Garber sent earlier that day to students and staff. In the letter, he stated that the government’s withdrawal from these partnerships not only impacts the health and well-being of millions but also affects the economic security and vitality of the nation. He also mentioned that the administration was violating the university’s rights to free speech and overstepping its authority to enforce civil rights. Just hours later, the Trump administration responded with its customary autocratic rhetoric, asserting that Harvard’s statement reinforces “a troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges.”

Harvard’s president also stated that federal investment does not come with the obligation to uphold civil rights laws, which the administration has distorted to fit its autocratic schemes. However, Harvard is not the only university targeted by the administration; this is part of a broader effort to use taxpayer dollars to intimidate schools into eliminating DEI programs and other initiatives that do not align with their illiberal democratic agenda. Vice President JD Vance has called these universities “the enemy,” and last month, the administration warned over 60 universities that there would be potential enforcement if they did not fulfill their obligations to protect Jewish students. Much of this pressure followed pro-Palestine protests that erupted across campuses last year. The administration has already frozen billions of dollars for other major universities, including Cornell and Columbia; with the additional $2.2 billion frozen at Harvard, there is over $6 billion more on the line if these institutions do not comply.

Harvard’s president emphasized that for more than three-quarters of a century, federal dollars have supported innovation in medicine, engineering, and other sciences. The Trump administration’s actions against Harvard University and other institutions pose a significant concern for academic freedom and the pursuit of knowledge. In the face of such challenges, it is essential to stand up for one’s values and principles, as Harvard’s President Alan Garber has done.

“No government,” Garber wrote, “regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.” Excerpt from: Trump administration freezes more than $2.2 billion after Harvard rejects its demands

Commentary: Why do republicans constantly attack the first amendment? Do they think, that citizens are too dumb to understand, that they’re trying to undermine the constitution? Are they trying to trick the patriots, into believing that the first amendment only protects them or whomever the GOP decides is deserving of it? Politicians are very much aware that they are cheating the people who voted them into office. They were elected to represent the public, not to rule the public. The first amendment is the people’s business, not the government’s business. Specifically, what that means, is that the government has no business in the people’s business, period! The only reason republicans want to suppress the first amendment—is so that the public won’t see their illegal dealings, they are perpetrating against them. They want to hide their corruption—they’re against transparency, because they believe they’re smarter than their constituents.
When will the government stop oppressing the public? They’re already imposing exorbitant taxes on us and now they want to take away our civil rights, too? When will the patriots open their eyes and see that they are members of the public, too? They’re obviously not exempt from being subjected to the same government tyranny!

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Amendment I

Sam Harris: The great problem of our time

Sam Harris: Breaking the spell of propaganda | Full Interview

“Just because the Republicans won the elections by tricking voters with their fear-mongering, does that mean the Republican wannabe autocrats own the libs? If not, then why do Americans put up with Trump and his sycophantic cronies’ middle school bully antics?” By: B. Bondman

“The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant.” By: Maximilien de Robespierre [That’s why the free speech will always be the enemy of the (authoritarian) state.]

Transcript from: Trump administration freezes more than $2.2 billion after Harvard rejects its demands

AILSA CHANG, HOST:

Today, Harvard University rejected the Trump administration’s demands that it end its diversity, equity and inclusion programs, among other policy changes. At stake for Harvard is about $9 billion in federal contracts and multiyear grants. NPR’s Jonaki Mehta has been following all of this and joins us now. Hi, Jonaki.

JONAKI MEHTA, BYLINE: Hi, Ailsa.

CHANG: Hi. OK, so exactly what did the Trump administration want Harvard to change about its policies?

MEHTA: Yeah, on Friday, the administration sent Harvard a list of demands that range from asking the university to eliminate DEI programs, like you said, to make sure its hiring practices incorporate, quote, “viewpoint diversity” and to start screening international students for what the administration considers, quote, “supporting terrorism or antisemitism.” After the letter was issued, there were protests this past weekend at Harvard. And the American Association of University Professors has also sued the administration.

CHANG: OK. And what is Harvard now saying in response to these demands?

MEHTA: Yeah, so Harvard’s President Alan Garber wrote a letter to students and staff today that said, quote, “no government, regardless of which party’s in power, should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.” He also went on to say that even though some of the demands outlined by the government were aimed at combating antisemitism, the majority were trying to regulate the, quote, “intellectual conditions” at Harvard.

Now, Harvard’s lawyers also listed all the ways in which the university has, in the past 15 months, reviewed programs on its campus to make sure they’re addressing antisemitism and following the law. Essentially, Harvard’s lawyers are saying there are no legal grounds for this move. I reached out to the White House, and in part, their spokesperson said, quote, “President Trump is working to make higher education great again by ending unchecked antisemitism and ensuring federal taxpayer dollars do not fund Harvard’s support of dangerous racial discrimination or racially motivated violence.”

CHANG: OK. Well, Jonaki, I mean, we have seen threats to DEI programs across the country at all kinds of educational institutions, but can you just give us a sense of where enforcement on all of that stands right now?

MEHTA: Yeah, so Harvard is certainly not the only university the administration has been targeting. This is part of a larger push for them to use taxpayer dollars to pressure schools to eliminate diversity programs. In fact, JD Vance, the vice president, has called universities the enemy. We’ve also seen the administration threaten to pull funding from K through 12 schools now for what it considers to be, quote, “illegal DEI.” And last month, the administration sent over 60 universities letters warning them that there would be potential enforcement if they didn’t fulfill their obligations to protect Jewish students on campus. And, you know, for higher-ed institutions, a lot of this pressure came after a wave of pro-Palestinian protests broke out across college campuses last year.

CHANG: Right.

MEHTA: The administration has already frozen billions of dollars for major universities like Columbia, Cornell, Northwestern, University of Pennsylvania. And for Harvard – which is one of the wealthiest universities in the world – it’s $9 billion in current and future funding that’s on the line.

CHANG: Yeah, I mean, $9 billion feels like a massive sum of money, even for Harvard. I’m just curious, like, how is that money used at Harvard and at other colleges?

MEHTA: In his letter to staff and students today, Harvard’s president mentioned how federal money, for more than three-quarters of a century, has helped pay for innovations in medicine, engineering and other sciences, treatments for diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, diabetes, for breakthroughs in artificial intelligence. And other universities have said similar things about the kinds of lifesaving and groundbreaking research they may also have to halt because of these federal cuts.

CHANG: That is NPR education reporter Jonaki Mehta. Thank you so much, Jonaki.

MEHTA: Thank you, Ailsa.