Harvard Tells Trump, NO!
While universities cower, research is abandoned, visas are being revoked, and students disappear, one stands alone - for now
This is an update on the recently published essay, “The Loss of Intellectualism and Global Leadership Looms.”
If it was not clear before, it should be now: President Trump is trying to take over higher education, beginning with the country’s elite (Ivy League) universities. Hiding behind the very thin veil of fighting anti-Semitism, the president demanded that unless Harvard made sweeping changes, he would suspend over 2 billion dollars in federal support. The New York Times reported the president sent the university a letter saying the university had failed to live up to the “intellectual and civil rights conditions” that justify federal investment. Ten categories for proposed changes are given, some of which can be read here. Harvard’s rejection of Trump’s demands prompted him to threaten to remove the university’s tax-exempt status. Whatever you might think about the country’s higher education system, this seems to be a fight to the death of intellectualism.
Thought leadership has been democracy’s hallmark
Since the Industrial Age, the U.S. has enjoyed global leadership in higher education, research, innovation, and technology advances that have improved most people’s lives. Since the mid-nineteenth century, public and private investments in higher education have caused the U.S. to consistently be ranked as the best place in the world to be educated after high school.
Global Citizens Solutions estimates that over $40 billion in revenue (2023) is realized when student visa holders attend U.S. universities and colleges. The prestige of being educated at U.S. universities was high among other reasons (quality of life, visa options, and post-graduate opportunities) for coming to the U.S. Demands for higher education outside of a student’s home country will increase significantly.
However, the Times Higher Education’s 2025 World University Rankings show that the collective reputation of U.S. colleges and universities has declined nine percent over the past decade, even though they remain among the top global institutions. A growing belief that scholarly research in the U.S. is declining is of concern. So should be the administration’s war on higher education and international students.
Attracting intellectual talent has been a mainstay of the country’s culture. Other countries, like China, have caught on to this think tank strategy. Now, increased global competition for scholars and researchers means a school’s reputation can no longer be a country’s only recruitment tool. These days, students’ decisions are increasingly guided by the perceived return on their investments of time and talent instead of an institution’s reputation.
New rule: Immigrants voicing their points of view is a privilege
In 2024, Trump promised that if elected, he’d kick student green card holders out of the country who promoted anti-Semitism. His executive order (signed February 2025) gives his promise teeth. It also backs the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism pushed for by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Rebuked by over one hundred human rights organizations and the U.N., the IHRA definition makes criticism of Israel anti-Semitic. The impact of this new litmus test has been devastating.
To date, hundreds of immigrant students have had visas revoked. High-profile cases like that of Mahmoud Kahlil, Ksneila Petrova, and the abduction of Tufts doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk, whose whereabouts were unknown for at least 24 hours, have all shocked many. They all represent a sharp rebuke of efforts, once highly valued, to attract the world’s best and brightest. It’s the rejection of the promise embraced by Emma Lazarus’s poem The New Colossus, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” still found on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty, that is becoming the nation’s image.
New rule: Authoritarians dictate what intellectualism’s value
Many students come to the U.S. to flee oppressive authoritarian leadership. Historically, foreign students have enjoyed the same free speech rights as U.S. citizens. They enjoyed freedoms of expression that they did not have in their home country. Freedoms that caused many people to be jailed or murdered were theirs.
Last Spring (2024), Columbia University became the flashpoint for global pro-Palestinian college campus protests. The second protest, an encampment, forced campus closure. Congressional hearings on antisemitism on college campuses (December 2023) had already taken their toll, with the presidents of Penn and Harvard resigning. Groups like the Betar Movement called for the expulsion of pro-Palestinian student activists. And Trump listened.
In March 2025, President Trump threatened to withhold $400 million in grants from Columbia (including funds for Alzheimer’s and cancer research) if the school did not respond to student dissent and anti-Semitism allegations in ways he demanded. The move surprised many. Withholding grants to leverage institutions previously entrusted with self-governance had never been done.
The ACLU called the administration’s action “grossly exceed[s] your authority under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and violate fundamental principles of academic freedom secured by the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” However, Columbia capitulated! Their decision, in the view of many, yielded to autocracy’s dominion over intellectualism.
New rule: Visa holders’ rights are fragile
By attracting diverse intellectual talent and abilities to the country, colleges and universities have pursued collaborations in the pursuit of problem-solving and societal advancement without regard for political differences. Their research has prevented and cured diseases. Their inventions have changed our lives. They’ve nurtured generations of problem solvers and thought leaders who’ve incubated transformational achievements of global impact. Upon higher education the country bestowed a sacred trust: attract and nurture the world’s best and brightest so we may lead.
In this, the Information Age, humanity’s advancements increase exponentially as time passes. It’s a terrible time for the country to say to those who come to study and contribute to this country and the world, in its anti-DEI, anti-immigration zeal, the benefit and the privilege of being in the U.S. is yours. And to receive that privilege, you must abide by new rules - freedoms of speech and movement are not guaranteed for visa holders.
New rule: Public funds can be used for autocratic rule
The Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, has recently sent letters alerting sixty colleges and universities that they are under investigation for anti-Semitic discrimination and harassment. The letters warn of potential enforcement actions if they fail to protect Jewish students. They also tell schools that U.S. colleges and universities can no longer guarantee student visa holders the same free speech rights that immigrant students have always enjoyed.
To date, in addition to the $400 million taken from Columbia and the $2 billion threat against Harvard, Trump has threatened to pull $510 million from Brown University and paused $175 million in federal funding from the University or Pennsylvania (for allowing a transgender athlete to compete on the women’s swimming team). Both John’s Hopkins University and Princeton University have lost grants, resulting in the discontinuation in research and programs. Bringing higher education into compliance with Project 2025 standards is the perspective that should drive the Trump administration’s actions. The use of public funds for authoritarian governance is another of the new rules that higher education must now navigate. As must we all!
Al fin: New rules enforcing old barriers
Many fear that the president’s new rules align so integrally with Project 2025 conservative mandates that U.S. higher education will be reduced to the same dystopian reality that exists in many countries. The beginnings of similar class/caste mobility limitations are already evidenced in declines in qualified Black applicants at elite colleges and universities and Black student enrollment overall. Indeed, in countries where authoritarians rule, you will not find a Katherine Johnson, a Ron McNair, an Eniola Shokunbi, a Misty Copeland, a Robert F. Smith, or anyone else who has risen like Amanda Gorman to ascend the dais of a presidential inauguration.
Yet, there’s hope. The coming tsunami of significantly diverse, quality-of-life-oriented, tech-savvy, global citizens (also known as Generation Z) will forever change the country. It may not be in my lifetime. They are coming, though! The only questions are: what resources will they inherit, and what impediments will they have to overcome?
On a personal note, a little over eight years ago, my wife, a brown skin woman a shade or three lighter than me, and I were in the doctor’s office for her monthly check-up. We now have twins. A woman, also brown skinned, sitting beside her asked if she was worried about having a Black baby. There was no animus in the woman’s tone. She came across as concerned for the plight of Black babies in a country where skin color determines social status and opportunities.
