Harvard President Vows to Defend Academic Independence Amid $2.2 Billion Federal Funding Freeze

Harvard President Alan Garber

Harvard University President Alan Garber has firmly rejected demands from the Trump administration that would tie the school’s federal funding to government oversight of admissions and hiring practices. The administration has threatened to freeze over $2.2 billion in grants after Harvard declined to implement a list of “critical reforms.”

Garber, who assumed leadership of Harvard in 2024, emphasized in a public statement that the university would not compromise on its core principles, calling the federal demands an illegal attempt to control academic decision-making. He said the lawsuit Harvard filed on April 15 was necessary to protect both the institution's independence and the future of research-driven higher education in the United States.

According to Garber, the administration's April 11 letter requested permission to audit the school’s hiring and admissions for a period of three years. After Harvard refused, federal officials cited the university’s alleged failure to properly address antisemitism and harassment of Jewish students as justification for the funding freeze.

While acknowledging ongoing issues of antisemitism on campus, especially in the wake of the Israel-Hamas conflict that escalated in October 2023, Garber said the grants in question support vital scientific research and are unrelated to campus culture or student behavior.

The research now under threat includes efforts to improve survival outcomes for childhood cancer patients, study how cancer spreads at a molecular level, predict infectious disease outbreaks, and treat battlefield injuries sustained by U.S. soldiers. Garber said that halting such work would have devastating consequences.

“Putting that research at jeopardy because of claims of antisemitism seems to us to be misguided,” Garber stated. “The effort to address antisemitism will not be advanced by shutting off funding.”

He warned that any interruption to research funding would cause long-term damage. Projects may be impossible to restart, clinical trials could be disrupted, staff might lose their positions, and animals involved in ongoing studies might need to be euthanized.

Garber also voiced concern for the broader partnership between the federal government and research universities—a relationship he said has been central to the U.S. becoming a leader in global science and technology. “That partnership has been responsible over the decades for dramatic innovation,” he said. “There is so much at stake.”

Federal officials defended their stance, arguing that institutions like Harvard have failed to protect students’ civil rights, particularly Jewish students, and have tolerated disruptive behavior under the guise of political protest. They said continued taxpayer support should be conditional on universities upholding civil rights laws.

President Donald Trump suggested in a Truth Social post that Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status entirely. The administration has also frozen grant funding to other Ivy League institutions including Columbia and Princeton, intensifying a broader conflict with elite universities.

Garber’s stance has received strong support within the academic community, with more than 150 university leaders signing a letter condemning the administration’s actions. Despite the pressure, he said Harvard is prepared for a long legal and political battle.

Asked whether he believed Harvard could win, Garber said, “I don’t know the answer. But the stakes are so high that we have no choice.”