Pursuing Trump with a Flamethrower in the Library: Literary Conflagration Pursuit of Trump
Harvard Undergoes Oversight by the White House Amid Trump's Aggressive Education Policies
President Donald Trump's administration has moved to exercise control over Harvard University, one of the oldest and most prestigious educational institutions in the United States. The White House's measures, which include restricting federal research funding and potentially capping international student admissions, have sparked a fierce opposition from the university.
The battle against education is witnessing one of its most significant escalations with the White House's challenge to Harvard. Allegations of anti-Semitic activities and a lack of alignment with the administration's policies have prompted the White House to exert control from multiple angles. The aim appears to be the curtailment of various sources of income for the private Ivy League university.
Harvard, with an annual budget of $6.5 billion, is bracing for a 20% shrinkage in income due to the White House's measures. Around 11% of the university's income comes from federal funds for research, a source the government seeks to eliminate completely, and tuition fees for international students are also at risk. Harvard contends that the White House's actions constitute a "vendetta campaign" and asserts its right to shape its curriculum, operations, and campus autonomously.
Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem issued a threat to ban international students from the university, setting a short deadline for data submission. Harvard successfully sued, arguing that such a move would cause "sudden and irreparable harm" to the university. However, Trump's government remains undeterred and responds only by acknowledging the prescribed 30-day appeal period. Meanwhile, it has taken another approach by suspending worldwide student visa interviews at U.S. embassies and plans to scrutinize applicants' social media profiles more closely, particularly denying or revoking visas for pro-Palestinian and Chinese students for political reasons.
In April, the White House accused Harvard of tolerating anti-Semitic activities and presented a series of sweeping demands, including the handover of all data on international students and their protest activities over the past five years. Harvard complied, but the government deemed the data insufficient and escalated the situation. International students make up 27% of the university's total student body.
The demands from Washington extend beyond these specific measures. According to a special commission established by the White House, it seeks to place Harvard under supervision "at least until the end of 2028," as stated in its April letter. The university is required to share all planned changes with the government, which will then "thoroughly review" the implementation of the new rules during this period.
The imposition on Harvard includes abolishing all equal opportunities programs, reorganizing student enrollment and teaching staff appointments accordingly, barring foreign students deemed "enemies of American values and institutions," and promptly reporting any such students' misconduct. By the year's end, the university must examine "diversity of thought" throughout its operations and, if deemed insufficient, hire teaching staff and enroll students in "critical mass" in all study programs. Harvard is expected to enable its students to anonymously report any violations of the university to the government.
Parallel to these actions, the US government threatens to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status for educational institutions. Education Secretary Linda McMahon also froze federal funds, accusing Harvard of concealing contributions from foreign donors and governments. Harvard denies these allegations, arguing that it has disclosed everything. The allegations against Harvard range from anti-Semitism and terrorism to suppression of free speech and civil rights violations to "systematic lawbreaking."
One of the allegations from Trump's government is that whites are being discriminated against. By accusing Harvard of discrimination under the guise of the anti-Semitism accusation, the administration inverts the history of racism in the U.S. and portrays its predominantly white voter base as victims. However, two years ago, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court banned the practice of selecting students based on racial quotas. The largest proportion of newly enrolled students at Harvard was still white even after the ruling, while whites systematically populate the bottom of the applicant pile in professorships and other teaching positions, according to a study.
Trump's government is also concerned with ideological differences, as the academic establishment is seen as too left-leaning and not conservative enough. In reality, Harvard only represents a limited political spectrum in the U.S., with a small proportion of students identifying as conservative. The White House's actions extend beyond Harvard, as it accuses over 60 universities across the country of anti-Semitism and threatens investigations and withdrawal of financial research support.
J.D. Vance, a conservative who graduated from Yale University, once characterized his faculty as "totalitarian," claiming that conservatives had no place on his campus. He alleged that the dominant leftists were an oligarchy, silencing Americans who complained. He argued that it was absurd to send children to universities where they would be indoctrinated and accumulate debt for a middle-class life. "It's about power," Vance explained. The White House is now questioning this power with all available force.
Questions remain regarding the operationalization of the administration's demands. Would there be an ideological screening of potential students, teachers, and professors, perhaps a MAGA quota? What are the criteria to ensure this? How would curricula be controlled in content, and what changes would be imposed from above? What would the White House consider a reportable offense on a denunciation hotline? Would Homeland Security or ICE intervene?
Without doubt, the envisioned steps bear resemblance to an authoritarian state rather than the freedom of opinions demanded by the White House. It is evident that the administration aims to amplify conservative voices, but the means by which they plan to accomplish their goals remain unclear.
The Commission, in light of the ongoing political tension and allegations of anti-Semitic activities, has also been asked to submit a proposal for a directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to ionizing radiation, as education-and-self-development and general-news await the resolution of the White House's ongoing conflict with Harvard University. In the realm of crime-and-justice, the government's actions against Harvard have raised concerns about potential violations of civil rights and free speech, further fueling discussions on the appropriate balance between politics and education.
