The Trump administration has taken a significant step against Harvard University by informing the institution that it will no longer be eligible for new federal grants. This decision was communicated in a letter from Education Secretary Linda McMahon, who criticized the university for what she termed “disastrous mismanagement.”
In her letter, McMahon stated, “This letter is to inform you that Harvard should no longer seek grants from the federal government, since none will be provided.” This action marks the administration's first major response following Harvard's lawsuit challenging the government's decision to cut billions in research funding after the university resisted oversight demands.
An official from the Education Department indicated that Harvard's eligibility for research grants is contingent upon addressing concerns related to antisemitism on campus, race-based policies, and accusations that the university has neglected “academic excellence” while maintaining a lack of conservative faculty.
Harvard officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Recently, the university has adopted a more confrontational stance against the administration, asserting that President Trump’s threat to revoke its tax-exempt status lacks legal basis.
McMahon's letter, which emphasized key points in all-capital letters, reiterated familiar criticisms from Trump and conservative commentators, accusing Harvard of undermining the higher education system and engaging in “ugly racism” and “humiliating plagiarism scandals.” She stated, “At its best, a university should fulfill the highest ideals of our nation,” but claimed that Harvard has “betrayed its ideal.”
The administration's latest threat indicates a shift in tactics against elite universities. Previous actions involved stripping existing grants, which raised the potential for legal challenges. Harvard's lawsuit is based on the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, following the abrupt suspension of over $2 billion in funding.
University leaders nationwide are concerned about a systematic approach to cutting research funding that could be more challenging to contest legally. A blanket ban on grants could still lead to litigation, but a more structured process may be harder to oppose in court.
Since returning to office, Trump has targeted elite universities, viewing them as adversarial to conservative values. Harvard, in particular, has been at the forefront of this conflict.
Last month, the administration sent Harvard a list of demands, including audits of professors for plagiarism and reporting international students accused of misconduct. Although the administration later claimed the letter was sent in error, tensions have continued to escalate, with Harvard accusing the government of seeking “unprecedented and improper control.”
Harvard, like other top research institutions, relies heavily on federal funding, which accounted for approximately 11 percent of its revenues in the 2024 fiscal year, amounting to around $687 million. Despite its substantial endowment of over $53 billion, much of this funding is restricted, limiting its use. A prolonged freeze on new grants could have severe financial implications for the university, which is already exploring options to raise funds through bond markets.
In her letter, McMahon highlighted Harvard’s wealth, suggesting that the university's endowment provides a “head start” in a future without federal grants. She remarked that much of the endowment was “made possible by the fact that you are living within the walls of, and benefiting from, the prosperity secured by the United States of America and its free-market system you teach your students to despise.”