Judge Richard Stearns needed four pages to hold that a university may violate Title VI for two academic years, retain every federal dollar it received, and defeat the United States by merely behaving itself once the government’s letter arrives. His order dismissing United States v. Harvard is brief, and that brevity is load-bearing: the reasoning cannot withstand a longer look at the statute, precedent, or his own prior findings.
In August 2024, in Kestenbaum v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the same judge reviewed the same campus and refused to dismiss a private Title VI suit brought by Jewish students. He called Harvard’s response to their harassment “at best, indecisive, vacillating, and at times internally contradictory.” He warned that crediting the university’s public statements would “reward Harvard for virtuous public declarations that for the most part&#8230; proved hollow when it came to taking disciplinary measures against offending students and faculty.” His bottom line traveled around the world: “the facts as pled show that Harvard failed its Jewish students.”
Those facts barely rate a footnote, which declines to “further rehearse” the 2023-24 allegations because prior opinions, including his own, had already fleshed them out. What matters now, the court says, is the calendar. The government alleged only three later incidents, all in March 2025, and none after June 30, 2025, when the agency formally advised Harvard of its failure to comply. Those incidents were “too isolated and episodic” to show continuing institutional noncompliance; without an ongoing violation, there was no case.
The quiet the court found so probative arrived under guard. By March 2025, Harvard was operating under two antisemitism settlements, an Office for Civil Rights investigation, a presidential task force, and undivided federal scrutiny. The Kestenbaum record had already described Jewish students removing visible markers of Jewish identity and avoiding Jewish events. Incident counts fall when the targets hide. Harvard’s own amended complaint in its funding lawsuit admitted that there is still “much work to do.”
Then came a public warning against mistaking silence for compliance. On July 2, 2026, six weeks before this order, 170 Harvard faculty and staff published an open letter reporting that during the previous year, the very period the court reads as recovery, Jews and Israelis wore baseball caps over their kippot, hid their Stars of David, and scrubbed Jewish-sounding names or activities from their resumes. Students describing these experiences insisted on anonymity for fear of retribution. The essay published alongside the letter supplied the headline: “Harvard’s Antisemitism Problem Has Gone Underground.” Its point was simple: when hate goes quiet, it has either disappeared or gone underground. Harvard’s own community reported the latter.
The closest doctrinal analog points the other way. Under the Supreme Court’s voluntary cessation cases, a defendant claiming reform bears a “formidable” burden to show that the conduct will not recur. The doctrine does not govern a motion to dismiss, but it names the danger: treating temporary quiet as conclusive proof of reform. This order drew that inference from silence, then asked the government to disprove it at the pleading stage.
Here is what the order quotes from 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-1: enforcement may proceed only after the agency “has advised the appropriate person or persons of the failure to comply with the requirement and has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means.” Here is what it does not quote: any language requiring the failure to continue after notice. Why? Because no such language exists. The statute speaks of “the failure to comply,” the completed event the notice addresses. The ongoing-violation requirement that decided this case appears nowhere in the text Congress wrote. The order imported a mootness-like requirement into a notice provision.
The recoupment analysis is even more vulnerable. The order assumes, without deciding, that the government may use “any other means authorized by law” to recover funds Harvard drew during the violation years, then rejects that backward-looking claim because nothing happened after notice. But recoupment is retrospective by definition, and notice necessarily postdates the violations it identifies. Bell v. New Jersey and Bennett v. Kentucky Department of Education held in the federal-grant context that recovering funds obtained on broken assurances collects a debt, not a penalty. Barnes v. Gorman describes Title VI as Spending Clause legislation “much in the nature of a contract” and says recipients are on notice of remedies traditionally available for breach. Together, those cases point sharply against the order’s premise. At a minimum, they demanded analysis. Instead, the order makes recoupment effectively unavailable whenever a recipient cures before notice. Getting caught now cures everything.
Footnote three deserves its own appeal. This was a motion to dismiss, where well-pleaded facts are accepted as true and reasonable inferences are drawn for the government. Yet the court faulted the government for failing to identify “any rational basis” for the agency’s determination that voluntary compliance could not be secured. APA reasonableness review ordinarily proceeds on an administrative record, often at summary judgment. When Harvard challenged the funding freeze in President and Fellows of Harvard College v. HHS, it received full APA review on cross-motions for summary judgment and won. Here, the government’s determination was dispatched in a footnote, without a record and with the inference drawn against the pleader. Footnote three gets one thing right: refusing the government’s demands is not, by itself, noncompliance with Title VI. But the complaint alleged the statutory notice and the statutory determination, and a motion to dismiss takes those allegations as true. The footnote did not find them implausible. It demanded the proof behind them, before any rule required proof at all.
The government warned that the ruling would make it “virtually impossible for the United States to win a Title VI suit because a reasonable defendant would cease its indifference as soon as the United States threatens to withhold funding.” The court called that a “fevered forewarning of potential havoc,” then adopted the forecast and declared it a happy ending: a defendant scared into behaving is the statute working as intended. The order insists it is “limited to the specific circumstances presented here.”
But violations, followed by notice, followed by temporary quiet, will recur whenever a sophisticated recipient changes course when funding is threatened. And if the problem was only the age of the allegations, it could have been cured by amendment. Yet the order dismissed the complaint outright without addressing futility or granting leave to amend. A pleading defect became a substantive amnesty.
The government should appeal. Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are reviewed de novo, and the statutory text and Supreme Court precedent will be waiting at the First Circuit. It should also investigate the post-notice incidents identified in the faculty letter and, if the facts support it, bring a new action. Finally, the agency may pursue § 2000d-1’s administrative termination process, with a hearing, an on-the-record finding, and a report to Congress, subject to judicial review on a fully developed record. The government should preserve all three paths.
The judge who found in 2024 that Harvard failed its Jewish students has now ruled that the United States arrived too late to impose any consequences for it. The court of appeals should explain the difference between a deadline Congress enacted and one that was invented.
***
Mark Goldfeder is CEO of the National Jewish Advocacy Center and a law professor at Touro Law School. @markgoldfeder on X

House Committee Hears Testimony On Antisemitism On College Campuses

How Harvard Won By Making Hate Go Quiet

antisemitism

DW Opinion

Harvard University

A federal judge dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit accusing Harvard of failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students from harassment, ruling Thursday that the government failed to show that the university remains in violation of federal civil rights law.
U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns granted Harvard’s motion to dismiss the case, finding that the government&#8217;s amended complaint did not sufficiently allege that Harvard is currently violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The lawsuit, filed by the Justice Department in March, accused Harvard of turning “a blind eye to antisemitism and discrimination against Jews and Israelis” following the wave of pro-Palestinian demonstrations that erupted after Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israel.
But Stearns found that the government’s case relied overwhelmingly on incidents from the 2023-24 academic year. Only three incidents cited in the amended complaint occurred afterward, all in March 2025.
 “Without diminishing any concern arising from these occurrences,” Stearns wrote, the incidents were “too isolated and episodic” to support a finding that “any institutionalized noncompliance with Title VI persists at Harvard to this day.” 
The timing was particularly important because Title VI requires the government to notify a recipient of federal funds of its alleged noncompliance and determine that voluntary compliance cannot be secured before seeking judicial enforcement. 
The government sent Harvard that notice on June 30, 2025, but the amended complaint did not allege violations occurring after that date. Stearns said the administration&#8217;s interpretation of the law would effectively turn Title VI into a mechanism for punishing schools rather than bringing them into compliance.
The judge also rejected the administration’s alternative argument that it could seek damages for alleged violations from the 2023-24 school year.
Stearns did not rule that the earlier allegations of antisemitic harassment were false. His dismissal turned on whether the government had sufficiently alleged an ongoing violation that could support relief under Title VI. 
The Trump administration&#8217;s amended complaint pointed to incidents in which Jewish students were allegedly harassed, physically assaulted, stalked, and spat upon during campus demonstrations.
Harvard has insisted that it has taken steps to address antisemitism, including establishing a task force, changing disciplinary policies, and making administrative changes.
The university has also successfully challenged several other elements of the Trump administration’s campaign against it. Other litigation remains ongoing, including disputes over billions of dollars in federal research funding and the administration’s efforts concerning Harvard’s international students.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said the Justice Department disagreed with Stearns’ ruling and was considering its next steps. 
“The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is actively investigating antisemitism nationwide,” Dhillon <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/education/6027947-judge-dismisses-harvard-antisemitism-lawsuit/">said</a>, noting that the department has an “extensive and active portfolio” of antisemitism enforcement cases.

TOPSHOT-US-ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN-CONFLICT-PROTEST

Judge Throws Out Trump’s Harvard Antisemitism Case

anti-Israel

Anti-Semitism

anti-Zionism

campus

Harmeet Dhillon

Harvard

higher education

Intifada

Trump Administration

The following is an excerpt from the new book ​​”<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Poisoned-Ivies-Academic-Americas-Universities/dp/1668087537/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.j306CWFwpsasj544DoZskg.x7d6MxQNY3W7C4_i3nSg1CNXwSThLN55XNmuxbmamSE&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;qid=1776193998&amp;refinements=p_27%3AElise+Stefanik&amp;s=books&amp;sr=1-1&amp;text=Elise+Stefanik">Poisoned Ivies: The Inside Account of the Academic and Moral Rot at America&#8217;s Elite Universities</a>,” by Elise Stefanik (Threshold Editions, April 14, 2026)
* * *
America’s higher education system is in the midst of a historic reckoning. The compact that existed for generations between our republic, the American people, and our institutions of higher learning has irrevocably broken down. Universities once dedicated to the pursuit of truth and academic excellence have become centers of radical political indoctrination—all while being generously subsidized by hardworking American taxpayers.
Americans of both parties, college-educated and non-college-educated, have lost faith in our universities at a staggering pace. A September 2025 Gallup poll revealed an astonishing trend; only about one-third (35 percent) of Americans today think that a college education is “very important.” That’s a rapid drop from 2019, when 53 percent of Americans agreed with that proposition. In 2010, it was 75 percent.
This hasn’t happened in a vacuum. Colleges and universities across the country have actively undermined their standing in the public imagination. They have chosen to embolden the most radical members of their faculty and staff. They have forced the divisive and discriminatory “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) regime as gospel. They have proactively silenced and canceled students and teachers who disagree with the groupthink progressive political agenda.
Just look at the data. Democrat faculty outnumber Republicans by at least eight-to-one at any major university. And political bias isn’t the only troubling issue. More than one-third (34 percent) of college students now say “using violence to stop campus speech” is acceptable. This is an absolutely stunning statistic and even more disturbing after the nation saw the horrific footage of Charlie Kirk’s assassination on a university campus during one of his iconic college tours where the main purpose of the event was to engage in respectful discourse and peaceful debate. Many on the Left, including some Democrat elected officials, viciously celebrated the loss of this young man’s life, saying it was somehow justified and deserved. This is a deeply disturbing and dangerous turning point for our national fabric and political culture.
<div id="attachment_1077721" style="width: 391px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Poisoned-Ivies-Academic-Americas-Universities/dp/1668087537"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1077721" class="size-large wp-image-1077721" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/Stefanik-book-381x576.jpg" alt="Cover credit: Threshold Editions" width="381" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/Stefanik-book-381x576.jpg 381w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/Stefanik-book-199x300.jpg 199w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/Stefanik-book-768x1160.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/Stefanik-book.jpg 993w" sizes=" (max-width: 381px) 100vw, 381px" /></a>Cover credit: Threshold Editions</div>
Activism has come at the cost of education. Students are not learning the skills in the classroom that once defined a college graduate. Not only are they showing up academically unprepared, but they are leaving uneducated, unemployable, radicalized, and deeply out of touch with American values. Approximately one-third of college students require remedial classes before they begin earning credits. But once they start taking classes, grade inflation is worse than ever. They know less, but get better grades, than previous generations. More than 60 percent of college students admit to cheating.
Meanwhile, college tuition has increased at a preposterous rate as the value of a degree has declined. The average college student leaves school saddled with $40,000 of debt. A mere 30 percent of 2025 college graduates found entry-level jobs in their chosen field, while nearly half felt unprepared even to apply for entry-level jobs.
The American people are smart. We know that something has gone catastrophically wrong, and we are tired of being asked to foot the exorbitant bill on autopilot for a broken system that morphs students into anti-American zealots.
This didn’t happen overnight. The tremors leading up to this earthquake have offered warning signs for decades. An education system that was the envy of the world is now facing questions of its importance, quality, and meaning. A course correction is long overdue—so overdue, in fact, that the questions are no longer about minor improvements and reform; they have become existential. Questions such as: Are American colleges educating or indoctrinating? Can higher education even be reformed, or do we need to completely rebuild it from scratch? What is being taught in the classrooms, and why? When colleges and universities lose their way, how do we hold them accountable? How much foreign money is funding American higher education? Is a traditional college education even remotely worth the absurdly out-of-reach tuition price tag? Are these “elite” colleges and universities even worth saving? Americans are right to ask these hard questions. And the toughest questions are being posed to the most “elite” schools.
The most prestigious colleges and universities in America make up what is known colloquially as the Ivy League. The Ivy League, nestled in the Northeast and scattered across New England, is made up of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, University of Pennsylvania, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell. While each university has its own distinct character with unique qualities, these institutions taken as a group have historically been considered the bellwether and compass of American higher education. They set the standards and norms that other universities aspire to achieve, not just in the United States, but around the world.
Historically, Ivy League colleges were known for their institutional prestige, academic excellence, esteemed faculty, rigorous and extremely selective admissions processes, groundbreaking research, and extraordinarily successful alumni networks. Attending an Ivy League school was supposed to guarantee professional success for graduates. They were the crown jewels of the entire higher education system worldwide. For generations, admission to an Ivy League school meant winning a golden ticket to the American dream.
Today, that once-pristine reputation has been sullied. Most Americans understand the Ivy League schools as something different. Instead of bastions of knowledge and vibrant intellectual life, they are considered hotbeds of radical ideology, groundless elitism, intellectual laziness, and anti-American hatred. The reputation of these schools has declined dramatically. It has been poisoned.
This process of institutional decay, almost entirely self-inflicted, culminated in a once-in-a-generation congressional hearing on antisemitism with university presidents in December 2023. This was the moment Americans decided that enough was enough. Our universities were failing us and our next generation of leaders.
At that hearing, a single line of questioning revealed the depths of the moral and academic rot in higher education. The presidents of Harvard, University of Pennsylvania (UPenn), and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) were asked to testify before Congress on the wave of antisemitism on their campuses after Hamas’s terrorist attack against Israel on October 7, 2023. One question went viral and quickly became the most viewed congressional testimony in United States history. It was truly the hearing heard around the world. 
I know because I asked the question. 
“Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate your university’s code of conduct on bullying or harassment?” This was not a political question. It was a moral one. I thought it would be the easiest, most straightforward question of the hearing. I assumed their answers would be a resounding yes. But to my shock, the presidents of MIT, UPenn, and Harvard, arguably the most prestigious universities in the world, answered one after another deadpan and nearly verbatim: “It depends on the context.” And the world heard.
<div id="attachment_1077739" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1077739" class="size-large wp-image-1077739" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-1825446548-864x576.jpg" alt="Representative Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York, during a House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2023. Lawmakers on the education committee will grill the leaders of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology about their responses to protests that erupted after the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas. Photographer: Haiyun Jiang/Bloomberg via Getty Images" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-1825446548-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-1825446548-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-1825446548-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-1825446548.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Haiyun Jiang/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Their morally bankrupt answers astonished everyone who heard them, including me. These university presidents were supposed to be some of the most learned, intelligent people in America, if not the entire world. They were the people responsible for teaching the next generation of leaders in every field imaginable. They were the leaders of the most prestigious universities in the world. My immediate reaction was apparent to everyone watching. I couldn’t hide my shock. I questioned them further, asking them to elaborate on what they meant—giving them an opportunity to correct the record and state the obvious. And still, they refused to give a clear statement. They refused to state clearly that calling for the genocide of Jews violated their universities’ codes of conduct.
I knew immediately that this was a significant hearing. I didn’t realize in the moment, however, that it would become a historic earthquake that instantly reshaped the debate on higher education overnight. The hearing changed the trajectory of higher education. In the weeks and months that followed, campuses exploded into riotous antisemitic encampments. Subpoenas poured into campuses as Congress opened multiple investigations. Scandal-plagued university presidents and compromised trustees resigned. Campus chaos shaped a presidential election.
Today, as a result of this hearing, elite campuses are in the midst of a generational upheaval. Governance structures are in question. Faculty and curricula are under scrutiny. Billions of dollars in foreign funding have been exposed. The long-standing relationship between the federal government and universities is being revised. Matriculation trends are shifting. Nothing is the same.
Nor should it be. Our hearing reset the course of American higher education. It was a reset that I firmly believe was long overdue.
This book tells the inside story of what is happening on America’s campuses and why. It goes in depth, with an insider’s view, into the deep moral and intellectual rot in higher education. What began as a question about antisemitism triggered a watershed moment.
In the long term, the hearing lit the match for not only accountability, but a far-reaching educational reform movement that has only just begun. This very dark chapter for American colleges and universities can and must lead to light at the end of the tunnel. Our institutions of higher learning have fundamentally lost their way. They strayed far from their founding missions and grew nearly unrecognizable. But that does not mean that the American people have to settle for this rotted and poisoned status quo.
We can and must fix our higher education system and return our colleges and universities to their founding mission. It is within the American people’s power to correct when these schools fundamentally lose their way. And it is our responsibility to ensure that we are educating and not indoctrinating our next generation of leaders. Our colleges and universities should promote academic excellence, intellectual inquiry, and our nation’s highest ideals, not left-wing indoctrination, heinous antisemitism, and anti-Americanism. That’s why it is important to look at what went wrong in this particular moment in history in painstaking detail. By seeing where and why our most elite schools failed, we can chart a better course for the future.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from ​​”<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Poisoned-Ivies-Academic-Americas-Universities/dp/1668087537/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.j306CWFwpsasj544DoZskg.x7d6MxQNY3W7C4_i3nSg1CNXwSThLN55XNmuxbmamSE&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;qid=1776193998&amp;refinements=p_27%3AElise+Stefanik&amp;s=books&amp;sr=1-1&amp;text=Elise+Stefanik">Poisoned Ivies: The Inside Account of the Academic and Moral Rot at America&#8217;s Elite Universities</a>,” by Elise Stefanik. Copyright © 2026 by Elise Stefanik. Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon &amp; Schuster, Inc. Reprinted by permission.

Harvard_Ivy_ES

Elise Stefanik: The Moment The Ivy League Lost The Country

Books

Claudine Gay

Congress

Jewish

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

U.S. House of Representatives

University of Pennsylvania

The Department of Justice <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-harvard-university-withholding-race-related-admissions-documents">filed a federal lawsuit</a> against Harvard University on Friday, alleging the Ivy League institution has unlawfully withheld admissions data required for a federal compliance review.
The lawsuit marks a significant escalation in the government’s efforts to monitor university admissions following the Supreme Court’s 2023 landmark ruling in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard, which effectively ended race-conscious admissions.
The civil action, filed by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, does not formally accuse Harvard of active racial discrimination. Instead, it seeks to compel the university to produce individualized applicant data, admissions policies, and internal correspondence related to race, ethnicity, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
“Harvard has failed to disclose the data we need to ensure that its admissions are free of discrimination,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “We will continue fighting to put merit over DEI across America.”
The dispute traces back to April 2025, when the DOJ initiated compliance reviews of Harvard’s undergraduate college, law school, and medical school. The department requested five years of applicant-level data — including test scores (SAT, ACT, MCAT, and LSAT), GPAs, extracurriculars, and essays — disaggregated by race and ethnicity. Federal officials say this level of detail is necessary to determine if the university is circumventing the Supreme Court&#8217;s mandate by using &#8220;race-neutral&#8221; proxies to achieve the same &#8220;racial balancing&#8221; the Court previously deemed unconstitutional.
According to the complaint, Harvard has “slow-walked” the process for over ten months. While the university has produced over 2,000 pages of documents, the DOJ <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1427621/dl">characterizes</a> most of these as &#8220;publicly available&#8221; materials, such as financial aid brochures and aggregated statistics. The government alleges that Harvard has repeatedly missed extended deadlines, with the last meaningful production occurring in May 2025.
“If Harvard has stopped discriminating, it should happily share the data necessary to prove it,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon.
The lawsuit highlights the unique position of Harvard as the world’s wealthiest university, boasting a $56.9 billion endowment. Despite its vast private resources, the university remains subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act because it receives significant federal funding. In 2024 alone, Harvard received $686 million in federal research grants; the DOJ notes that the university is currently slated to receive over $2.6 billion in total federal assistance. Under federal law, recipients of such funds must allow the DOJ to examine records to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination statutes.
In the 2023 SFFA ruling, the Supreme Court found that Harvard’s previous admissions program resulted in a significant decrease in the number of Asian American applicants admitted, famously labeling the university’s use of race as a “pernicious stereotype.” The current DOJ investigation aims to verify whether those &#8220;negative factors&#8221; have truly been eliminated. Specifically, the DOJ is seeking &#8220;searchable electronic spreadsheets&#8221; that would allow investigators to compare the qualifications of admitted versus rejected students across different racial groups.
Harvard, which admits only 4.2% of undergraduate applicants and 3.2% of medical school applicants, has defended its processes in the past as holistic and compliant with the law. However, the DOJ argues that by refusing to provide individualized data, Harvard has breached a material term of its federal funding contracts.
The lawsuit seeks no monetary damages or the immediate revocation of federal funds. Rather, it asks the court to declare Harvard in violation of its contractual and statutory obligations and to order the immediate release of the requested documents.
Legal experts suggest the outcome could set a precedent for how much transparency the federal government can demand from private universities regarding their internal selection processes in the post-affirmative action era.

The Trump Administration Ups The Ante After Harvard Tries To Play DEI Hardball

Justice Department Sues Harvard Over Refusal To Disclose Admissions Data

admissions

Department of Justice

Editor’s note: This week, we’re reprinting some of our best stories from the past year. This piece, published in March, details Harvard&#8217;s detachment from a partnership with a Hamas-friendly university.
The Harvard School of Public Health suspended its partnership with a Palestinian university whose faculty and students have endorsed and collaborated with Hamas and other terror groups, according to the <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/3/27/harvard-suspends-birzeit-partnership/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Harvard Crimson</a>.
The suspension follows extensive reporting by The Daily Wire into Birzeit’s terrorist ties that led to 27 members of Congress <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/lawmakers-demand-harvard-cut-ties-with-hamas-collaborator-palestinian-university" target="_blank" rel="noopener">calling for</a> Harvard to “immediately shut down this partnership and condemn Birzeit University.”
Harvard suspended the partnership as part of the Harvard School of Public Health’s investigation into Harvard’s FXB Center, which started last summer, School of Public Health spokeswoman Stephanie Simon told the student paper.
A memorandum of understanding between the FXB Center and Birzeit expired in recent months and Harvard decided not to renew it, according to Simon. While an official partnership will not exist, the FXB Center, which collaborates with Birzeit faculty and scholars, will reportedly continue.
In a Q&amp;A with the <a href="https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/03/a-year-into-role-chan-school-dean-focused-on-driving-change-amid-deep-challenges/">Harvard Gazette</a>, Dean Andrea Baccarelli said a &#8220;blue-ribbon panel of experts&#8221; were appointed to conduct the review of the FXB Center to &#8220;rigorously evaluate the FXB Center’s current status and future potential.&#8221; The review is expected to conclude this spring.
The FXB Center <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/harvard-to-host-summer-program-at-palestinian-university-dominated-by-hamas" target="_blank" rel="noopener">co-hosted</a> the “Palestine Social Medicine Course” with Birzeit University last summer, where students learned about “settler colonialism.” The program was originally supposed to take place on Birzeit’s campus in Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank, until it <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/harvard-cancels-program-with-hamas-friendly-university-over-security-concerns" target="_blank" rel="noopener">was relocated</a> to Jordan “due to security concerns.” Under the suspension, Harvard will no longer co-sponsor the program this year and Harvard students will not be eligible to participate because of security concerns. Instead the 2025 Social Medicine Course will be sponsored by Birzeit and the World Health Organization.
At the time, Simon told The Daily Wire she was aware of Birzeit’s student body’s association with Hamas, but said it has not affected its program.
“Student government elections at Birzeit typically involve candidates affiliated with each of the major political parties in the region, including Hamas,” she said. “These student government elections are not germane to and have not affected the FXB Center’s work with the scholars and students at Birzeit’s Institute of Community and Public Health.”
Birzeit University <a href="https://archive.ph/eRaU6" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called for</a> “glory for the martyrs” after Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack on Israel, and has a long history of promoting terrorists on its campus. The university has hosted funerals and parades for terrorists on its campus, where several buildings are named after terrorists.
Hanan Ashrawi, chairman of Birzeit University’s board of trustees, denied that Hamas sexually assaulted Israelis on October 7, and has defended Hezbollah and the lynching of Israeli soldiers, according to <a href="https://camera-uk.org/2019/05/14/indy-fails-to-challenge-hanan-ashrawis-claim-shes-always-rejected-violence/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CAMERA UK</a>.
On its website, Birzeit <a href="https://www.birzeit.edu/en/about/history" target="_blank" rel="noopener">boasts</a> that it is a “thorn in the side of the occupation,” and says it is committed to making an impact through “resistance.”
In 2023, the Birzeit student body elected two blocs affiliated with terrorist organizations — Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)— into the student government. In the election, which had a 77 percent voter turnout, the Hamas-affiliated Islamic bloc won 25 of the 51 seats, while the PFLP picked up six, according to the <a href="https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-744135" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jerusalem Post</a>.
In July, five members of the student council were arrested for attempting to carry out a terror attack on behalf of Hamas. The students were found with an assault rifle and thousands of dollars of cash from Hamas, the Times of Israel <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-university-students-in-west-bank-arrested-for-planning-significant-terror-attack/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>.
Birzeit <a href="https://archive.is/q0BXN" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shared a letter</a> from its faculty and employee union last April which praised the “global intifada,” called for an Israel boycott, and refrained from calling the United States by name, instead opting to use “Turtle Island,” a term used by so-called “anti-colonialists” to suggest that the United States exists on stolen Native American land.
Birzeit’s faculty includes notable terrorist sympathizers, including assistant professor Basil Farraj who wrote <a href="https://www.jadaliyya.com/Details/45912" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a eulogy</a> for Walid Daqqa, the leader of a group that kidnapped and killed an IDF soldier.
Philosophy professor Abdaljawad Omar appeared at a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rashida-tlaib-faces-calls-to-be-removed-from-congress-after-speaking-at-terrorist-connected-event" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PFLP-linked conference</a> attended by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, where he praised the October 7 attacks for opening “so many doors of political possibility” and said the “promise of liberation it holds would not have manifested in our conference without the capacity to resist.” Omar also denied accusations of rape and criticized the IDF for refusing to allow Israel to be taken over by the “Palestinian military” in <a href="https://mondoweiss.net/2023/10/how-and-why-israels-disinformation-campaign-is-enabling-its-massacre-in-gaza/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an op-ed</a> shortly after the attack.
“Israel chose not to engage in negotiations with any groups within its borders, leading to substantial collateral damage in numerous hostage situations,” Omar wrote. “The Palestinian military strategy aimed to delay Israel’s retaking of the area around the strip. In contrast, Israel was intent on swiftly reclaiming the territory, seemingly without regard for the safety of its own citizens.”
Several other schools <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-dark-relationship-between-u-s-universities-and-the-anti-american-school-controlled-by-terrorists" target="_blank" rel="noopener">have had relationships</a> with Birzeit, including Rutgers University, which affirmed its relationship with Birzeit in May amid student encampment protests. William Paterson University entered into an <a href="https://www.wpunj.edu/provost/international-academic-agreements/Birziet.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agreement with</a> the Hamas-run university in 2022 for exchange programs, sharing curricula, and joint degree programs. Other schools, such as MIT, have recently co-hosted conferences, invited Birzeit professors for speaking events, or had student groups visit its campus.
<div class="c-message_kit__gutter">
<div class="c-message_kit__gutter__right" role="presentation" data-qa="message_content">
<div class="c-message_kit__blocks c-message_kit__blocks--rich_text">
<div class="c-message__message_blocks c-message__message_blocks--rich_text" data-qa="message-text">
<div class="p-block_kit_renderer" data-qa="block-kit-renderer">
<div class="p-block_kit_renderer__block_wrapper p-block_kit_renderer__block_wrapper--first">
<div class="p-rich_text_block" dir="auto">
<div class="p-rich_text_section">A spokeswoman for Harvard University declined to comment.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Best Of 2025: Harvard Cuts Ties With Hamas-Friendly Birzeit University 

Education

Hamas

Palestinian

U.S.

Higher education is in a downward spiral of decreasing public confidence from which it is incapable of escaping without outside intervention.
For ideological and political reasons, however, most of higher ed is rejecting out-of-hand the Trump administration’s offers to help move higher ed back towards the center. That may prove to be a historic mistake.
A recent <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/15/growing-share-of-americans-say-the-us-higher-education-system-is-headed-in-the-wrong-direction/">Pew survey shows</a> 70% of Americans, including majorities across all major demographic groups and both political parties, believe academia is going in the wrong direction. In 2010, 75% of Americans thought college was “very important,” <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/695003/perceived-importance-college-hits-new-low.aspx">according to Gallup</a>, and today only 35% do. This is an all time low.
There are many reasons for the loss of confidence, but part of it certainly is that higher education, particularly at the “elite” level, is a liberal bubble isolated from the mainstream. <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/9/3/faculty-response-liberal/">At Harvard</a>, for example, under 10% of the faculty self-identify as conservative or very conservative compared with <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/655190/political-parties-historically-polarized-ideologically.aspx">approximately 38%</a> of the general public. Over 60% identify as liberal/very liberal compared to only 25% of the general public.
Harvard and other elite institutions do not “look like” America politically. For decades campuses cultivated a <a href="https://criticalrace.org/">Critical Race and DEI culture</a> that prizes group identity over individual merit, orthodoxy over debate, and exclusion over persuasion.
I see it at Cornell. DEI is a worldview that treats people as members of group identity categories and functions with something close to religious fanaticism. Changing the name from DEI to Inclusion and Belonging, as Cornell did, is just a superficial ploy.
<div id="attachment_995745" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-995745" class="size-large wp-image-995745" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/GettyImages-2216970707-864x576.jpg" alt="TOPSHOT - Graduates gather as they attend commencement ceremony at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 29, 2025. US President Donald Trump is furious at Harvard for rejecting his administration's push for oversight on admissions and hiring, amid the president's claims the school is a hotbed of anti-Semitism and &quot;woke&quot; liberal ideology. (Photo by Rick Friedman / AFP) (Photo by RICK FRIEDMAN/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/GettyImages-2216970707-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/GettyImages-2216970707-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/GettyImages-2216970707-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/GettyImages-2216970707.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />RICK FRIEDMAN/AFP via Getty Images</div>
While mocking the general public, higher ed depends on that public, in the form of the federal government, which provides <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/G160311A027NBEA">hundreds of billions</a> in federal grants and support annually. Many top-tier research universities rely on federal grants and support for substantial <a href="https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/how-much-federal-funding-do-colleges-and-universities-receive">double-digit</a> percentages of their budgets.
With the change in federal government control from Joe Biden to Donald Trump, a clash over funding and the trajectory of higher education was inevitable.
President Trump’s critics say he is trying to smash higher education. That is wrong. What he is doing, with a bluntness that makes people uncomfortable, is using federal funding, the only lever left to rescue the failing system.
The administration’s new <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Compact-for-Academic-Excellence-in-Higher-Education-10.1.pdf">Compact</a> for Academic Excellence in Higher Education offers financial incentives and expedited funding for institutions that reform and certify compliance in encouraging diversity of viewpoint, stopping discrimination, and raising merit rather than group identity as the focal point for advancement.
It’s a carrot and stick approach. The reward for moving towards the center is preferential funding treatment. For those that refuse, they can continue in the current system, where scrutiny of civil rights compliance risks loss of funding.
While the Trump administration has encouraged schools to seriously consider and provide feedback on the Compact, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/universities-defiant-trumps-academic-excellence-compact-feedback-deadline-passes">most who have responded</a> have rejected any negotiation.
Instead, academia has embarked on a campaign to demonize the Trump proposal, framing it as “extortion.” While the higher education public relations campaign has had <a href="https://archive.is/2025.10.24-233217/https://www.chronicle.com/article/americans-think-trump-is-overreaching-on-higher-ed">some impact</a> in turning the public against Trump’s Compact, that doesn’t change the reality of public loss of confidence in higher education.
Objections to the Compact center on maintaining academic independence. That’s great in concept, but the reality is that nearly-complete independence has turned higher ed into an unsustainable political bubble.
Up to now, higher ed had almost unlimited funding and independence. All they had to do was not go crazy left. But they couldn’t restrain themselves, and that’s how they got Trump’s Compact.
An adult in the room is needed, and the Trump administration is attempting to play that role.
Most of the Compact’s proposed reforms are necessary. Protect free expression. Enforce existing conduct rules. Make administrators responsible for compliance. Limit practices that have turned American universities into leftist enclaves detached from the nation. The goal is not to impose a conservative orthodoxy but to restore diversity of thought and bring higher ed back towards the center.
Though the original deadline for the first nine schools has passed, the administration <a href="https://x.com/EDSecMcMahon/status/1979323613548364278">continues in discussion</a> with them and others and has signaled openness as well. The universities should engage enthusiastically.
The Compact is not perfect, and there are some provisions that could be negotiated at least on a school-by-school basis. But to reject it out of hand is a sign that higher ed has not yet come to grips with reality.
Under the current system, America’s universities are losing the public&#8217;s confidence and will lose public funding and relevance. The Compact is not an attempt to destroy higher education, it’s an attempt to save higher ed from itself.
* * *
William A. Jacobson is a Clinical Professor of Law at Cornell Law School and founder of the <a href="https://legalinsurrectionfoundation.org/">Legal Insurrection Foundation</a> and its <a href="https://equalprotect.org/">Equal Protection Project</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.

Widener Memorial Library with Huge Veritas Banners Harvard University Cambridge MA

Trump Extends An Olive Branch To Academia. The Ivory Tower Slaps It Away.

American Universities

Cornell University

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Donald Trump

Ivy League

Opinion

Harvard University is set to host a drag performer who calls himself “LaWhore Vagistan” as a visiting professor at the Ivy League institution.
Kareem Khubchandani will teach in the Studies of Gender and Sexuality program, per <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/10/01/us-news/harvard-hires-drag-queen-named-lawhore-vagistan-as-visiting-professor/">The New York Post</a>. The classes offered will be “Queer Ethnography” in the fall and “RuPaulitics: Drag, Race, and Desire” in the spring semester, according to Harvard’s announcement.
Khubchandani did an “<a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/595546">interview</a>” with his own drag persona for Johns Hopkins University Press in 2015, during which he discussed his provocative stage name.
“My name is LaWhore Vagistan, my preferred pronouns are ‘she’ or ‘aunty.’ I chose ‘LaWhore’ because my family traces its origins to Pakistan: Lahore is an important city in Pakistan, and well, I’m a bit of a whore,” he said at the time. “And Vagistan because I see the subcontinent as one, big, beautiful Vag … istan.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a> 
Harvard isn’t the only place LaWhore worked as a professor. The drag performer has a bachelor’s degree in sociology and anthropology, as well as a Master’s degree and a PhD in performance studies from Northwestern University. His work has been published in several academic journals.
&nbsp;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Harvard hires drag queen named ‘LaWhore Vagistan’ as visiting professor <a href="https://t.co/2vL0LziK6T">https://t.co/2vL0LziK6T</a> <a href="https://t.co/YkNA4cA11f">pic.twitter.com/YkNA4cA11f</a>
— New York Post (@nypost) <a href="https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1973569177194492290?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 2, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
He is listed as an Associate Professor for Theatre, Dance, and Performance Studies and an Associate Professor in Race, Colonialism, and Diaspora at Tufts University.
Khubchandani is the author of “Ishtyle: Accenting Gay Indian Nightlife” (2020). 
The appointment of drag performer “LaWhore Vagistan” as a visiting professor at one of America’s most prestigious colleges comes as Harvard has become a central target of the Trump administration’s push to use federal funding to force change at U.S. universities, which Trump says are overrun with antisemitism.
Trump’s administration cracked down on Harvard for anti-Israel protests that followed Hamas’s October 7, 2023, terror attack.

Ivy League Insanity: Harvard Taps Drag Queen ‘LaWhore Vagistan’ As Visiting Gender Studies Professor

College

Drag Queens

Gender

Politics

Harvard University is reportedly willing to pay up to $500 million to settle a dispute with the Trump administration over alleged civil rights violations.
Negotiators are still discussing the exact terms of a settlement, The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/28/us/politics/trump-harvard-payment.html?unlocked_article_code=1.aE8.2qHi.ecIDeUuspHot&amp;amp;smid=url-share">reported</a> on Monday. The amount is more than double the $220 million that Columbia University recently agreed to pay to resolve accusations that the school failed to address antisemitism on campus.
&#8220;The Trump Administration’s proposition is simple and commonsense: Don’t allow antisemitism and DEI to run your campus, don’t break the law, and protect the civil liberties of all students,&#8221; White House spokesman Harrison W. Fields said before Harvard&#8217;s most recent hearing.
Fields said the administration was &#8220;confident that Harvard will eventually come around and support the president’s vision, and through good-faith conversations and negotiations, a good deal is more than possible.&#8221;
Harvard is reluctant to pay the federal government directly, the Times reported. Officials have been skeptical of Columbia&#8217;s agreement for an &#8220;outside monitor,&#8221; suggesting it could infringe on academic freedom.
President Donald Trump is insistent that Harvard pay more than Columbia, according to The Times. Harvard has a $53 billion endowment.
The school and its administration are waiting for a court ruling on federal funding cuts imposed by the Trump administration, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-administration-squares-off-with-harvard-in-court-over-federal-funding">reported</a>. The judge previously ruled against the government&#8217;s attempt to block the university from enrolling foreign students.
Harvard sued after the government cut federal funds, saying the move violates its First Amendment rights.
“No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” said Harvard President Alan M. Garber.
In the past, Trump has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-calls-harvard-an-anti-semitic-threat-to-democracy?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Calls+Harvard+%E2%80%98An+Anti-Semitic%E2%80%A6Threat+To+Democracy%E2%80%99" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> Harvard “Anti-Semitic,” “Far-Left,” and “a threat to Democracy.” The administration has found the university in violation of federal civil rights law, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-admin-finds-harvard-discriminated-against-jewish-students-threatens-funding">reported</a>.
But Trump has seemed pleased with recent talks.
&#8220;They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right,&#8221; Trump said in a June social media post.
In Columbia&#8217;s settlement, the school agreed to review Middle East-related programs; explore ways to improve and support Jewish students; and end diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)  policies.
The administration is using Columbia&#8217;s settlement as a model for dealing with other schools.
&#8220;Harvard wants to settle, but I think Columbia handled it better,&#8221; Trump told reporters Friday.

Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Library

Harvard Open To Paying $500M Settlement Amid Trump Crackdown On Campus Antisemitism

Columbia University

Harvard University is reportedly considering a new center for conservative scholarship amid criticism from the Trump administration that the school has drifted too far to the Left.
The Ivy League school has mulled starting a program for conservative scholarship for several years, but now the idea is gaining momentum, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/harvard-conservative-scholarship-center-trump-attacks-a187242a">according</a> to The Wall Street Journal.
The center could cost as much as $1 billion, and Harvard has already discussed the idea with potential donors, the Journal reported.
A Harvard spokesman said the school is ramping up work to set up such a center.
The program would “promote and support viewpoint diversity” and “will ensure exposure to the broadest ranges of perspectives on issues, and will not be partisan, but rather will model the use of evidence-based, rigorous logic and a willingness to engage with opposing views,” Harvard&#8217;s spokesman told the outlet.
If it takes shape, Harvard&#8217;s new center could potentially be modeled after Stanford’s Hoover Institution, which promotes personal liberty and limited government and is nonpartisan but widely viewed as conservative. Ronald Reagan was the Hoover Institution&#8217;s first honorary fellow.
However, the Trump administration would not necessarily view a new center purportedly for conservative thought as a significant step, the Journal reported, citing a person familiar with the administration&#8217;s perspective.
Harvard leaders&#8217; discussions about the potential center come amid a heated battle with the Trump administration over diversity, equity and inclusion practices as well as antisemitism.
In 2023, pro-Palestinian protests erupted on Harvard&#8217;s campus, sparking widespread backlash.
Harvard&#8217;s president at the time, Claudine Gay, was called to testify in front of Congress about the school&#8217;s response to antisemitism on campus. Her testimony was criticized after she <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ny-post-says-harvards-lawyer-contacted-them-for-looking-into-plagiarism-claims">hedged</a> on saying whether calling for the genocide of Jews violated the university&#8217;s codes of conduct.
The Trump administration has pulled billions in federal funds from the school, threatened Harvard&#8217;s tax-exempt status, and moved to block the school from enrolling foreign students.
Harvard is suing, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/harvard-sues-after-trump-admin-blocks-university-from-admitting-foreign-students">claiming</a> the administration is violating its First Amendment rights and trying to &#8220;control Harvard’s governance, curriculum, and the ‘ideology’ of its faculty and students.&#8221;
This week, the administration also threatened Harvard&#8217;s accreditation, accusing the school of violating federal discrimination law by failing to protect Jewish students from antisemitic harassment.
If Harvard were to lose its accreditation, it would also lose access to federal student aid, typically an existential event for universities that leads to their shuttering.
Harvard&#8217;s accreditation is handled by the New England Commission of Higher Education, which is not controlled by the government, but Education Secretary Linda McMahon sent the commission a firm letter about the issue.
&#8220;By allowing anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus, Harvard University has failed in its obligation to students, educators, and American taxpayers,&#8221; McMahon wrote.
She added that the Education Department expects the commission to keep the administration &#8220;fully informed of its efforts to ensure that Harvard is in compliance with federal law and accreditor standards.&#8221;

Students Hold ‘No Justice Walkout’ Amid Sexual Harassment Lawsuit

Harvard Weighs New Conservative Center As Trump Targets School: Report

The DOJ cracks down on “sanctuary city” Los Angeles, Trump continues his feud with Jerome Powell, and Harvard and Democrats try to slow Trump’s budget bill as the clock ticks down on the president&#8217;s self-imposed July 4 deadline.
It’s Tuesday, July 1, and this is the news you need to know to start your day.
Morning Wire is available on video! You can watch today’s episode here: 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="DOJ Sues LA &amp; Trump Targets The Fed | 7.1.25" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MXELAmmbVbg?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/doj-sues-la-trump-targets-the-fed-7-1-25/id1576594336?i=1000715263497" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>L.A. On ICE</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-941599" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-1.jpg 1920w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: The Trump administration has sued the city of Los Angeles over its &#8220;sanctuary&#8221; status.
The Justice Department <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-lawsuit-against-sanctuary-city-policies-los-angeles-california">filed a lawsuit</a> on Monday against L.A., arguing that its “sanctuary city” policies violate the U.S. Constitution. Local law enforcement in L.A. is prohibited from directly enforcing federal immigration law or collaborating with ICE on immigration enforcement actions. The DOJ argues that L.A. is discriminating against the federal government, specifically treating immigration officers differently than other law enforcement officials. The suit says L.A.’s sanctuary policies are &#8220;invalid&#8221; and should be blocked.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=freedom&amp;utm_content=freedomeditorial&amp;_gl=1*r8odly*_gcl_au*MTQ5MDUzNjQ0NC4xNzQ1ODQ0MzMyLjEwNDAyMzM0NDQuMTc0NzY1MzIxNy4xNzQ3NjUzMjE3*_ga*MTM1OTk4Njg2NS4xNzA2NzE2NTAy*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*czE3NTEyOTIzMDQkbzMyJGcxJHQxNzUxMjkyOTI5JGo1NyRsMCRoMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=freedom&amp;utm_content=freedomeditorial" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-75638">JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free</a>
In a statement, Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed these sanctuary policies for the recent anti-ICE riots, which she said were the “driving cause of the violence, chaos, and attacks on law enforcement that Americans recently witnessed in Los Angeles.” She added that jurisdictions like L.A. “that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level.” The DOJ has also <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-lawsuit-against-sanctuary-city-policies-los-angeles-california">targeted</a> other sanctuary city policies, including in New York.
The Trump administration has consistently made detaining and deporting illegal aliens one of its main policy priorities. Recently, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/06/30/ice-raids-arrests-workers-companies/">dozens</a> of workplace raids have been carried out across the nation, in states like California, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, and many others. It appears that illegals with and without criminal backgrounds – aside from illegally entering the U.S. – have been picked up. Daily immigration arrests have also skyrocketed. In June, ICE has averaged around 1,200 daily arrests, with some days surpassing 2,000 – nearly double the daily average during Trump’s first 100 days, though still short of the administration’s target of 3,000 per day.
There are currently 59,000 immigrant detainees in federal custody – officials say that number is the highest in U.S. history, and these facilities are reportedly well over capacity. Additional funds for immigration enforcement and facilities are included in the Big, Beautiful Bill, currently making its way through Congress.
Meanwhile, as reported by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/feds-raid-california-home-harboring-iranian-nationals-with-terrorism-ties">The Daily Wire</a>, Customs and Border Protection raided a Los Angeles residence that it says was being used to harbor Iranian illegal aliens with ties to terrorists. On Friday, two unidentified individuals were arrested, and that followed a previous raid at the same home that resulted in the arrest of seven Iranian nationals, some of whom are on the FBI terror watch list and associated with an Iranian human smuggling network.
And DHS Secretary Kristi Noem will end Temporary Protected Status, known as <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/dhs-terminates-haiti-tps-encourages-haitians-to-obtain-lawful-status">TPS</a>, for up to 500,000 Haitians on September 2. DHS said in a press release that this decision “restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary.” A spokesperson added that the “environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home.”
<h2>Trump Hammers Harvard, Pummels Powell</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-941595" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-2.jpg 1920w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: Trump continues his assault on Jerome Powell and Harvard, targeting both the Fed chairman and the Ivy League institution.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt opened Monday’s White House press briefing by showing the White House Press Corps a scathing letter that President Trump sent to Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, which included a handwritten note from the president in which Trump urges Powell to lower interest rates by “a lot.”
<blockquote>“Jerome. you are as usual TOO LATE! You have cost the USA a fortune and continue to do so. You should lower the rate by a lot. Hundreds of billions of dollars are being lost, and there is low inflation.&#8221;</blockquote>
Meanwhile, the Trump administration informed Harvard that it found the university in “violent violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act,” which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin, through its treatment of Jewish and Israeli students. If Harvard fails to take action immediately to “institute adequate changes,” the university could lose all federal funding.
“[A] majority of jewish students experienced negative bias, felt physically unsafe, assaulted and spit on, concealed kippahs for fear of being harassed, and concealed identities from classmates for fear of ostracization,” Leavitt told reporters. “These are all facts that Harvard cannot dispute and that’s why the admin has found them in violation of Title VI and threatened to withhold their funding, because if you break federal law, you are not entitled to federal tax dollars.”
<h2>Dems Drag Big, Beautiful Bill</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-941597" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/MRN-7.1.25-Tue-Seg-Head-3.jpg 1920w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: Democrats are pulling out all the stops to thwart President Trump’s sweeping legislative agenda, which is slowly pushing its way through the two chambers despite some Republicans joining the opposition.
The Senate held a so-called vote-a-rama stretching past 21 hours as of early Tuesday morning, with Democrats forcing votes on amendments to the bill as a way of stalling – but also forcing Republicans to go on the record regarding topics like Medicaid funding and tax cuts for the wealthy, two issues on which Democrats believe Republicans are out of touch.
A few months ago, the idea of passing such a contentious piece of legislation through Congress seemed unlikely, given Republicans’ slim majority in both chambers and the competing interests within the party. Typically, in these situations, the president would push for their agenda to be broken up into smaller pieces and voted on piecemeal, but Trump has been adamant from the start that everything be included in one bill. 
Polling shows that the Big, Beautiful Bill is not all that popular with Americans — Pew has it with a net favorable rating of minus 20, Fox has it at minus 21, and Quinnipiac has it at minus 26. The White House says it is confident that once it passes and folks see the extra money in their paychecks, they’ll quickly change their tune.

MRN 7.1.25 Thumbnail_V1

Morning Brief: Trump Sues Los Angeles, Battles Harvard, And Pushes Big Beautiful Bill

Economy

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Jerome Powell

Lawsuit

Los Angeles

Media

Morning Wire

Tensions between Russia and the United States rise as Trump and Putin escalate their war of words, NPR follows Harvard in suing the Trump administration in order to retain public funding, and MAHA has set its sights on regulating pesticides, but it’s causing a rift among Republicans.
It’s Wednesday, May 28, and this is the news you need to know to start your day.
Morning Wire is available on video! You can watch today’s episode here: 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trump - Putin Faceoff &amp; NPR Sues Trump" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VKk5jyZbO18?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/trump-putin-faceoff-npr-sues-trump-5-28-25/id1576594336?i=1000710251200" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>NATO Readies For War</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-926063" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_00_22_06.Still002.jpeg" alt="" width="640" height="360" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_00_22_06.Still002.jpeg 640w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_00_22_06.Still002-300x169.jpeg 300w" sizes=" (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></div>
Topline: The U.S. reinforces Europe’s northern front as Russia ramps up its assault on Ukraine.
President Trump took public shots this weekend at Vladimir Putin, calling him “crazy” after he launched an unprecedented aerial barrage on Ukraine. The Kremlin responded by issuing a sarcastic statement, saying, “We are really grateful to the Americans and to President Trump personally for their assistance in organizing and launching this negotiation process…This is a very crucial moment, which is associated, of course, with the emotional overload of everyone absolutely and with emotional reactions.&#8221;
That clearly angered Trump, who issued a new statement on Tuesday with a clear threat. “What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren’t for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He’s playing with fire!”
A number of reports from the White House suggest the president could roll out new sanctions on Moscow as early as this week. Trump is reportedly concerned that sanctions could drive Putin even further from a ceasefire and prolong the war, but the reality is that, barring increased military support for Ukraine, he doesn’t have many other options for exerting pressure.
Because existing sanctions have essentially cut off all trade between the U.S. and Russia, new sanctions would have to target countries doing business with Moscow and theoretically isolate them from the global economy. One proposal would impose a 500% import tariff on any nation that continues to purchase Russian oil, natural gas, and petroleum. Leaders in Congress have told the White House they would approve new sanctions with overwhelming bipartisan support.
However, some experts believe the Russian war machine is robust enough to weather further Western sanctions.
“The Russian economy is relatively stable,” Rebekah Koffler, a former defense intelligence analyst and author of Putin’s Playbook, told The Daily Wire. “Russia produces in three months more military hardware than the entire NATO Alliance produces in one year. … Putin transitioned his military and economy on a wartime footing a decade ago in 2015. They&#8217;re even more adequate right now after three years than before.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
<h2>Trump Vs Harvard</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-926069" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_01_21_16.Still003.jpeg" alt="" width="640" height="360" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_01_21_16.Still003.jpeg 640w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_01_21_16.Still003-300x169.jpeg 300w" sizes=" (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></div>
Topline: NPR joins Harvard in suing the Trump administration – in an attempt to cling to their taxpayer funding.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration directed federal agencies to terminate $100 million in remaining contracts with Harvard, citing its failure to address antisemitism and promote national interests. This is the latest development in an ongoing feud between the White House and America’s oldest university, which in the span of about a month has included attempts to cut billions of dollars in federal grants to Harvard and restrict its ability to admit foreign students.
Last Friday, a federal judge in Boston issued a temporary restraining order, stopping the Trump administration’s attempt to block the enrollment of Harvard’s international students. The policy would impact more than 7,000 foreign visa holders, about 30% of Harvard’s student body. Harvard argues that the move by the Trump administration is a direct response to the university&#8217;s refusal to comply with demands to have race-blind admissions, end DEI programs, and screen international students for alleged ties to terrorism or antisemitism. Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, told NPR that these actions threaten not just the university, but critical research.
“They see this as a message,” Garber said. “If you don’t comply with what we are demanding these will be the consequences.”
Trump says he’s considering directing Harvard’s funding to trade schools to develop the American workforce instead.
“We give them billions of dollars, which is ridiculous,” Trump <a href="https://x.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1926773697458712841">said</a> on Sunday. “I&#8217;m not going to have a problem with foreign students, but it shouldn&#8217;t be 31%. It&#8217;s too much, because we have Americans that want to go there and other places, and they can&#8217;t go there … No foreign government contributes money to Harvard. We do.”
Meanwhile, NPR, along with three Colorado public radio stations, filed a lawsuit on Tuesday challenging President Trump’s May 1 executive order to cut all federal funding to NPR and PBS, which totals more than $500 million annually. The lawsuit argues the order violates the First Amendment’s protections of free speech and the press. NPR’s CEO, Katherine Maher, called it “retaliatory, viewpoint-based discrimination,” accusing the administration of punishing NPR for its reporting.
<h2>MAHA Eyes Pesticides</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-926067" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_02_18_10.Still004.jpeg" alt="" width="640" height="360" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_02_18_10.Still004.jpeg 640w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/SEGMENT-HEADERS.00_02_18_10.Still004-300x169.jpeg 300w" sizes=" (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></div>
Topline: A push to regulate pesticides is causing a rift within the GOP.
At the federal and state levels, there’s a looming battle within the Republican Party over potential pesticide regulations. Some Republicans and the broader MAHA coalition of activists want to see pesticides that have been banned in other countries, which are similarly prohibited in the United States. Others within the Republican Party say they’re worried about farmers in their districts who rely on pesticides like glyphosate, which has caught the eye of HHS, and there have been reports about concerns from within the White House that abrupt regulatory action could trigger supply chain issues.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has spoken out against pesticides for years, claiming that they’re poisoning American children. He’s not backing down from that, but his department has so far toed the line between these two camps in the GOP. For example, top Kennedy advisor Calley Means signaled earlier this month that while HHS will state the “truth” about pesticides, the department has no desire for “nanny state” regulatory measures on these chemicals.
“We ingest 25% of the world’s pesticides in the United States,” Means said at an Axios event. “Other countries across the world have chosen to phase [many leading American pesticides] out or ban them, calling them carcinogenic and disruptive to kids. … The policy solutions from this are not obvious. Pesticides are deeply ingrained into the U.S. agricultural system and it would be a disaster to phase them out tomorrow.”
Meanwhile, there’s legislation in more than a dozen states to shield Bayer – a German multinational chemical company that purchased the American agricultural giant Monsanto in 2018 – from forthcoming legal action over its “failure to warn” about potential harms associated with its products. GOP-led states <a href="https://www.insurancejournal.com/magazines/mag-features/2025/05/19/823734.htm#:~:text=A%20new%20first%2Dof%2Dits,weedkiller%20Roundup%20could%20cause%20cancer.">North Dakota</a> and <a href="https://hpj.com/2025/05/27/georgia-shields-bayer-from-roundup-lawsuits/">Georgia</a> have both passed laws to shield Bayer. Other states, including Iowa, Idaho, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee, have similar pending legislation. There have been n<a href="https://lacykatzen.com/blog/roundup-loss-in-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-is-a-victory-for-consumers-injured-by-the-dangerous-weedkiller/">early 200,000 lawsuits</a> filed against Bayer, connecting it to the development of cancer and other diseases.
“I think it’s atrocious to believe that any company – any company in America or anywhere – should get any form of blanket immunity for the products that they’re putting in the stream of commerce,” Missouri Republican state Senator Nick Schroer told The Daily Wire. Schroer said that state Republicans were divided over support for the bill, partially because of lobbying by Bayer, but also because many farmers are concerned that they may lose access to herbicides and pesticides if Bayer goes under.

MRN 5.28.25 Thumbnail_V1

Morning Brief: Trump-Putin Faceoff, NPR Sues Trump, & GOP Pesticide War

National Public Radio (NPR)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Ukraine-Russia War

Vladimir Putin

The Trump administration is pushing for all federal agencies to cancel or transition away from contracts with Harvard University by June 6.
Federal Acquisition Service Commissioner Josh Gruenbaum wrote in a Tuesday letter to all federal agencies to take steps to end any contract they might have with Harvard, accusing the university of engaging in racial discrimination in admissions and other discriminatory behavior. The contracts total approximately $100 million.
&#8220;We recommend that your agency terminate for convenience each contract that it determines has failed to meet its standards, and transition to a new vendor those contracts that could be better serviced by an alternative counterparty. Going forward, we also encourage your agency to seek alternative vendors for future services where you had previously considered Harvard,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote in a letter obtained by The Daily Wire. &#8220;We look forward to assisting you with terminating or transitioning these contracts.&#8221;
The letter cites numerous examples of how the Trump administration believes Harvard violated federal law.
&#8220;As relevant here, GSA (U.S. General Services Administration) understands that Harvard continues to engage in race discrimination, including in its admissions process and in other areas of student life. The statistical evidence of Harvard’s racial discrimination in their admissions — as revealed in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard — is shocking, to say the least,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
The letter noted that admissions rates for the top academic performance varied widely by race. The administration said the admission rates for the highest academic decile were 56% for African Americans, 31% for Hispanics, 15% for whites, and 13% for Asians.
&#8220;Harvard has shown no indication of reforming their admissions process — to the contrary, Harvard now has to offer a remedial math course, which has been described as &#8216;middle school math,&#8217; for incoming freshmen. These are the direct results of employing discriminatory factors, instead of merit, in admission decisions,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
Gruenbaum added that Harvard was suspected of having racial preferences not only in admissions, but also in hiring.
&#8220;Harvard is suspected of engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment in hiring, promotion, compensation, and other personnel related actions,&#8221; he wrote. 
He also cited &#8220;discriminatory practices&#8221; at the Harvard Law Review, which reportedly include expedited review for minority authors. The Trump administration previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-admin-launches-probe-into-harvard-law-review-over-treatment-of-white-contributors" target="_blank" rel="noopener">opened up</a> a probe into the journal last month.
The Trump administration has also taken issue with Harvard&#8217;s handling of anti-Israel protests, including the awarding of a $65,000 fellowship to a protester accused of assaulting a Jewish student.
&#8220;Harvard’s ongoing inaction in the face of repeated and severe harassment and targeting of its students has at times grounded day-to-day campus operations to a halt, deprived Jewish students of learning and research opportunities to which they are entitled, and profoundly alarmed the general public,&#8221; Gruenbaum wrote. 
More than $2 billion in federal funds for Harvard have been frozen as the university has pushed back on the Trump administration&#8217;s actions to crack down on DEI and campus activism.

Harvard University Campus

Trump Gives Deadline For Federal Agencies To Cancel Harvard Contracts

Affirmative Action

Executive

Menu