What was that?
Trump administration cuts off all future federal funding to Harvard
Odd letter ostensibly about funding asks Harvard "why is there so much HATE?"
John Timmer
–
May 6, 2025 12:19 pm
|
141
Credit:
Kevin Fleming
Credit:
Kevin Fleming
Text
settings
Story text
Size
Small
Standard
Large
Width
*
Standard
Wide
Links
Standard
Orange
* Subscribers only
Learn more
Minimize to nav
The ongoing war between the Trump administration and Harvard University has taken a new twist, with the government sending Harvard a letter that, amid what appears to be a stream-of-consciousness culture war rant, announces that the university will not be receiving any further research grants. The letter potentially suggests that Harvard could see funding restored by "complying with long-settled Federal Law," but earlier demands from the administration included conditions that went well beyond those required by law.
The letter, sent by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, makes it somewhat difficult to tell exactly what the government wants, because most of the text is a borderline deranged rant written in florid MAGA-ese. You don't have to go beyond the first paragraph to get a sense that this is less a setting of funding conditions than an airing of grievances:
Instead of using these funds to advance the education of its students, Harvard is engaging in a systemic pattern of violating federal law. Where do many of these "students" come from, who are they, how do they get into Harvard, or even into our country—and why is there so much HATE? These are questions that must be answered, among many more, but the biggest question of all is, why will Harvard not give straightforward answers to the American public?
Does Harvard have to answer these questions to get funding restored? It's unclear.
From there, the letter changes topic so often that it gets difficult to remember that billions of dollars of funding to some of the world's most prominent researchers is at stake. On the first page alone, the letter complains that a math class Harvard set up to handle COVID-driven gaps in incoming students' math skills is a remedial course that shouldn't be needed, given the university's supposedly high standards. The resignation of Harvard's former president, as well as its faculty hires, also make appearances. (Said hires being compared to "Hiring the captain of the Titanic to teach navigation.")
The first page closes with complaints that some of Harvard's leadership includes Democrats. The second page continues in kind, suggesting the university is engaging in fiscal mismanagement and accusing its diversity programs of being "ugly racism," before finally getting to the point: The university should no longer seek federal grants and should figure out how to get by on its endowment. "You have an approximately $53 Billion head start," the letter suggests, "much of which 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."
The letter wraps up by saying that the administration would have kept funding Harvard if it "committed to complying with long-settled Federal law," seemingly unaware that the Supreme Court decision that settled the status of diversity programs was only issued in 2023. It is also seemingly unaware of its own earlier letter to Harvard, which demanded conditions that are not spelled out by federal law, such as government approval of faculty hiring in order to ensure "viewpoint diversity."
It's clear that this letter is not a good-faith attempt to resolve the ongoing fight. And, while the letter is written in a style that seems intended to rally the Trump faithful, it's pretty unlikely that many of them will both read it and cheer on its messages. Instead, it seems like the only purpose of the letter is to ratchet up the pressure on Harvard by increasing the threat it faces. The letter's style is presumably a product of a culture that only knows how to communicate this way.
John Timmer
Senior Science Editor
John Timmer
Senior Science Editor
John is Ars Technica's science editor. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley. When physically separated from his keyboard, he tends to seek out a bicycle, or a scenic location for communing with his hiking boots.
141 Comments
How long will Switch 2’s Game Key Cards keep working? do sex
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products do sex
Relevance AI raises $24M to help businesses build AI agents do sex
Meet Posha, a countertop robot that cooks your meals for you do sex
Spotify now shows how many times people listened to podcast episodes do sex
Agree.com raises $7.2M to take on Docusign, Bill.com with AI do sex
