A US federal court has overturned billions in funding cuts by President Donald Trump’s administration to Harvard University.
Judge Allison Burroughs ruled the government violated the Ivy League college’s free speech rights when it revoked around $2bn (£1.5bn) in research grants.
The ruling is a major legal victory for Harvard, but the White House has vowed to appeal. When it froze funding in April, the Trump administration accused the college of antisemitism, “radical left” ideologies and racial bias.
Three other Ivy League universities, Columbia, Penn and Brown, struck deals with Trump to preserve funding that was at risk due to similar claims by the administration, rather than go to court.
Boston-based Judge Burroughs wrote in Wednesday’s ruling: “The Court vacates and sets aside the Freeze Orders and Termination Letters as violative of the First Amendment.”
She blocked the administration from stopping any more federal funding to the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based college and barred the government from withholding payment on existing grants.
The White House said they would immediately challenge the “egregious decision” and called the judge an “activist” who was appointed by former President Barack Obama and was never going to rule in their favour.
“Harvard does not have a constitutional right to taxpayer dollars and remains ineligible for grants in the future,” assistant press secretary Liz Huston said.
Alan Garber, president of the university, said in a statement on their website that “the ruling affirms Harvard’s First Amendment and procedural rights”.
“We will continue to assess the implications of the opinion, monitor further legal developments, and be mindful of the changing landscape in which we seek to fulfill our mission,” he added.
Judge Burroughs wrote in her 84-page decision that Harvard should have done more to deal with antisemitism, which she said had “plagued” the institution in recent years.
“Harvard was wrong to tolerate hateful behavior for as long as it did,” wrote the judge.
But she said that fighting antisemitism was not the Trump administration’s “true aim” in penalising the nation’s oldest and richest university.
She suggested the government had “used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities”.
Judge Burroughs has previously blocked Trump’s efforts to prevent Harvard from hosting international students.
The university sued the Trump administration over the funding freeze in April, while also pledging to fight antisemitism.
Harvard’s president said no government “should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue”.
Trump has also threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status and take control of the university’s patents stemming from federally funded research.
The government has been discussing with Harvard a potential deal to unfreeze federal funding. Trump has said he wants the university to pay no less than $500m.
Tag Archives: Cambridge
Newsweek: Trump admin plans new time limit for foreign students in US
The Trump administration is proposing new four-year time limits on student, exchange and media visa holders, as part of plans to tighten up immigration rules.
In a proposal filed in the Federal Register on Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced its intention to modify the F, J, and I visa categories.
“If enacted, this rule would create additional uncertainty, intrude on academic decision-making, increase bureaucratic hurdles and risk deterring international students, researchers and scholars from coming to the United States,” Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek.
Why It Matters
Student visa holders have been a focus of immigration enforcement under the second Trump administration, with many having their legal status revoked and interviews for new applicants paused for several weeks. This latest proposal revisits a plan from President Donald Trump‘s first term.
What To Know
The DHS said that, unlike many other visa types, F, J, and I visas currently do not have time limits; instead, they require holders to adhere to the rules of their respective visas. Under the new plan, four-year limits would be imposed, aimed at stopping lengthy visa overstays.
The three categories cover foreign students, exchange visitors—such as summer workers, au pairs, and medical students—and those in foreign media.
The DHS memo stated that part of the reason for seeking the new limits was due to the “dramatic rise” in these visas, with F visas (used by international students) increasing from 260,000 in 1981 to 1.6 million in 2023.
J visas (used by some students, academics, medical professionals, au pairs and other such visitors) experienced a 250 percent increase between 1985 and 2023, rising from 141,200 to approximately 500,000, while I visas (for media) also doubled during the same period.
The DHS stated that this posed a challenge to its agencies when it came to monitoring individuals in the U.S. with such visa types, and that a fixed-term approach would be more effective in managing immigration numbers.
For student visa holders, under the new proposal, they would have to either apply for a change in status at the end of their term (i.e., for an H-1B or other work-based visa) or ask for an extension of their F-1 visa if they have not completed their studies. Similar parameters would apply to I and J visa holders.
The Trump administration’s efforts to withdraw legal status for students and hold up interviews at the embassy stage have faced and lost to legal challenges in recent months, with student and exchange visitor advocates arguing that these programs deliver significant benefits to the U.S. economy.
What People Are Saying
Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek: “The proposed rule is yet another unnecessary and counterproductive measure targeting international students and scholars. It would require them to repeatedly submit additional applications just to remain in the country and fulfill requirements of their academic programs—imposing significant burdens on students, colleges and universities, and federal agencies alike.”
A DHS Spokesperson, in a statement shared with Newsweek: “For too long, past Administrations have allowed foreign students and other visa holders to remain in the U.S. virtually indefinitely, posing safety risks, costing untold amount of taxpayer dollars, and disadvantaging U.S. citizens. This new proposed rule would end that abuse once and for all by limiting the amount of time certain visa holders are allowed to remain in the U.S., easing the burden on the federal government to properly oversee foreign students and history.”
What Happens Next
DHS will now welcome comments and feedback on the proposals. When the idea was floated in 2020, over 32,000 comments were submitted, many of which were against the idea, which was subsequently scrapped by the Biden administration.
This makes zero sense to me. The longer students are here, the more educated & skilled they presumably become, and we should want them to stay longer … perhaps permanently.

https://www.newsweek.com/student-exchange-visa-changes-proposal-trump-administration-2120179
MSNBC: My family experienced apartheid. I know Afrikaners aren’t refugees.
If the Episcopal Church had agreed to resettle South African Boers, then it would have elevated a lie that will affect refugee resettlement for years to come.
The combination of the Trump administration granting expedited refugee status to white South Africans and the Episcopal Church ending a 40-year partnership with the federal government rather than help resettle fake refugees leaves me with contradictory feelings.
As an Episcopal priest and a dual citizen of the United States and South Africa, I am proud of the Episcopal Church for standing up and speaking out about the U.S. government’s lies of a white “genocide” in South Africa. In equal measure, I am devastated that the work our church has done for decades, giving hope and care to people forced to leave their homelands, is ending because of white supremacy and Christian nationalism.
…
If the Episcopal Church had agreed to resettle South African Boers, then it would have elevated a lie that will affect refugee resettlement for years to come. If white South Africans are experiencing genocide, then it is truly an enviable genocide. White South Africans, who are about 7% of the country’s population, own about 75% of South Africa’s farmland and control a great majority of senior corporate positions. Our Palestinian brothers and sisters experiencing a true genocide would likely be happy if they had control over 30% of their ancestral land.
…
The Episcopal Church has taken a moral stand. The Boers who arrived on U.S. soil this week are not refugees. They are white people using their privilege to leap over legitimate refugees who have been waiting to escape political repression and life-threatening situations.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-afrikaners-apartheid-refugees-genocide-rcna206660