A federal judge in Boston has ordered the reversal of more than $2.6 billion in research grant cuts to Harvard University, a move made by the Trump administration. U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled that the funding reductions amounted to illegal retaliation after Harvard declined White House demands for changes to its governance and policies.
The decision marks a significant outcome for Harvard, which has been engaged in a dispute with the Trump administration over several issues, including efforts to prevent the university from hosting foreign students and threats to revoke its tax-exempt status.
The government had linked the freezes at Harvard to delays in addressing antisemitism on campus. However, Judge Burroughs found little connection between federally funded research and antisemitism concerns. “A review of the administrative record makes it difficult to conclude anything other than that Defendants used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities,” Burroughs wrote.
The ruling reverses a series of funding freezes that escalated into outright cuts as tensions increased between the administration and Harvard. If upheld, it could restore Harvard’s research operations and hundreds of projects affected by the loss of federal money.
Outside court proceedings, discussions have taken place between Trump administration officials and Harvard about an agreement that would end investigations and restore access to federal funds. President Donald Trump has stated he wants Harvard to pay at least $500 million before any deal is reached, though no agreement has been finalized even as similar arrangements have been made with Columbia and Brown universities.
Harvard’s lawsuit claims that the administration retaliated against it after rejecting demands outlined in an April 11 letter from a federal antisemitism task force. The letter called for broad changes regarding campus protests, academics, and admissions in response to government accusations concerning liberalism and anti-Jewish harassment at Harvard.
On the same day Harvard rejected these demands, officials moved to freeze $2.2 billion in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon later announced that Harvard would not be eligible for new grants, followed by contract cancellations weeks later.
As legal proceedings continued, individual agencies began notifying Harvard that frozen grants were being terminated under clauses allowing cancellation if projects no longer aligned with government policy priorities. While Harvard has attempted to self-fund some research activities, university leaders have said they cannot cover all costs previously supported by federal funding.
In its motion for summary judgment, Harvard asked Judge Burroughs to overturn the cuts and prevent future reductions, arguing that they did not address antisemitism concerns.
Harvard President Alan Garber commented on academic freedom: “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.”
The Trump administration maintains that its actions were not retaliatory but rather part of ongoing reviews predating the April demand letter. It asserts broad authority to cancel contracts based on policy decisions. “It is the policy of the United States under the Trump Administration not to fund institutions that fail to adequately address antisemitism in their programs,” according to court documents.
