Education
Harvard Letter Points to ‘Common Ground’ With Trump Administration

Harvard University struck a respectful but firm tone in a letter to the Trump administration on Monday, arguing that the university and the administration shared the same goals, though they differed in their approaches. It was latest move in an extraordinary back-and-forth between the school and the federal government in recent weeks.
The letter from Alan M. Garber, Harvard’s president, was sent a week after the Trump administration said it would stop giving Harvard any research grants.
Last month, the university took the government to court over what it has called unlawful intrusion into its operations. But on Monday, Dr. Garber’s tone was softer, saying he agreed with some of the Trump administration’s concerns about higher education, but that Harvard’s efforts to combat bigotry and foster an environment for free expression had been hurt by the government’s actions.
Dr. Garber said he embraced the goals of curbing antisemitism on campus; fostering more intellectual diversity, including welcoming conservative voices; and curtailing the use of race in admissions decisions.
Those goals “are undermined and threatened by the federal government’s overreach into the constitutional freedoms of private universities and its continuing disregard of Harvard’s compliance with the law,” Dr. Garber said in the letter to Linda McMahon, the secretary of education.
The university’s response came one week after Ms. McMahon wrote to Harvard to advise the university against applying for future grants, “since none will be provided.” That letter provoked new worries inside Harvard about the long-term consequences of its clash with the Trump administration.
“At its best, a university should fulfill the highest ideals of our nation, and enlighten the thousands of hopeful students who walk through its magnificent gates,” Ms. McMahon wrote. “But Harvard has betrayed its ideal.”
Rolling through a roster of conservative complaints about the school, Ms. McMahon fumed about the university’s “bloated bureaucracy,” its admissions policies, its international students, its embrace of some Democrats and even its mathematics curriculum.
Ms. McMahon referred to Harvard as “a publicly funded institution,” even though Harvard is private and the vast majority of its revenue does not come from the government. She suggested that the university rely more on its own funds, noting that Harvard’s endowment, valued at more than $53 billion, would give it a “head start.” (Much of Harvard’s endowment is tied up in restricted funds and cannot be repurposed at will.)
“Today’s letter,” Ms. McMahon wrote, “marks the end of new grants for the university.”
In Dr. Garber’s letter on Monday, he said that the university had created a strategy to combat antisemitism and other bigotry, and had invested in the academic study of Judaism and related fields. But he said the university would not “surrender its core, legally-protected principles out of fear of unfounded retaliation by the federal government.”
He denied Ms. McMahon’s assertion that Harvard was political.
“It is neither Republican nor Democratic,” he said of the university. “It is not an arm of any other political party or movement. Nor will it ever be. Harvard is a place to bring people of all backgrounds together to learn in an inclusive environment where ideas flourish regardless of whether they are deemed ‘conservative,’ ‘liberal,’ or something else.”
Although Harvard is the nation’s wealthiest university by far, officials there have warned that federal cuts could have devastating consequences on the campus and beyond. During Harvard’s 2024 fiscal year, the university received about $687 million from the federal government for research, a sum that accounted for about 11 percent of the university’s revenue.
The government can block the flow of federal money through a process called debarment. But the procedure is laborious, and the outcome may be appealed. Experts on government contracting said Ms. McMahon’s letter indicated that the administration had not followed the ordinary procedure to blacklist a recipient of federal funds.
Harvard officials are aware that, even if they challenge the administration’s tactics successfully in court, Mr. Trump’s government could still take other steps to choke off money that would be harder to fight.
The federal government often sets priorities for research that shape agencies’ day-to-day decisions about how and where federal dollars are spent. Some academics worry that the government might pivot away from fields of study in which Harvard has deep expertise, effectively shutting out the university’s researchers. Or the administration could simply assert that Harvard’s proposals were incompatible with the government’s needs.
Jessica Tillipman, an expert on government contracting law at George Washington University, said that it can be difficult to show that the government is using a back door to blacklist a grant recipient.
“You basically have to demonstrate and point to concrete evidence, not just a feeling,” she said.
Still, she said, Ms. McMahon’s letter could offer Harvard an opening to contest a protracted run of grant denials.
“It’s not as hard to prove,” Ms. Tillipman said, “when you have a giant letter that said, by the way, we aren’t giving you these things anymore.”

Education
Video: Suspect In Custody For the Shooting of Charlie Kirk

new video loaded: Suspect In Custody For the Shooting of Charlie Kirk
transcript
transcript
Suspect In Custody For the Shooting of Charlie Kirk
Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah identified the suspect in the Charlie Kirk shooting in a Friday morning news conference.
-
We got him. On the evening of Sept. 11, a family member of Tyler Robinson reached out to a family friend who contacted the Washington County Sheriff’s Office with information that Robinson had confessed to them or implied that he had committed the incident. Investigators interviewed a family member of Robinson, who stated that Robinson had become more political in recent years. Investigators identified an individual as the roommate of Robinson. Investigators interviewed that roommate. Investigators asked if he would show them the messages on Discord. The content of these messages included messages affiliated with the contact Tyler stating a need to retrieve a rifle from a drop point, leaving the rifle in a bush. Investigators noted inscriptions that had been engraved on casings found with the rifle. Inscriptions on the three unfired casings read, “Hey, fascist!” Exclamation point. “Catch!” exclamation point.
Education
Video: Ukrainian Students Start New School Year in Underground Classrooms

new video loaded: Ukrainian Students Start New School Year in Underground Classrooms
By Jiawei Wang•
With Russian attacks ongoing and peace talks stalled, some students in Ukraine are attending classes underground. For some, it is their first in-person learning in more than three years of war.
Education
What Has the Trump Administration Gotten From Law Firms and Universities?

Harvard University claimed a victory in its legal case against the Trump administration on Wednesday, when a federal judge ruled that the government broke the law by freezing billions of dollars in research funding. The ruling, which the administration has pledged to appeal, potentially gave Harvard new leverage in its battle toward a settlement to restore funding, in exchange for payments demanded by President Trump.
About a dozen other universities and major law firms have struck deals with the government in recent months — instead of taking cases to court — to unfreeze funding or avoid restrictive executive orders.
Mr. Trump has used the full force of the federal government — opening civil rights investigations, freezing federal funding and threatening to cancel government contracts — to push for these agreements. These deals have reverberated across the legal industry and academia, and they could shape how other institutions respond to Mr. Trump’s methods.
Most of the deals involve paying millions of dollars, either in cash or legal services, to the administration. But the deals also include other concessions, like commitments to redefine discrimination, acquiesce to more government oversight and assess ideology.
Below, we break down what these deals have in common.
1. Money or legal services
Much of the focus around these deals has been around the money that Mr. Trump has demanded from each entity, payable either to his administration, or to state or compensation funds.
Brown University | $50 million over 10 years |
Rhode Island work force development organizations |
Columbia University | $200 million over 3 years |
The U.S. Treasury |
$21 million | A compensation fund to resolve alleged civil rights violations against Jewish Columbia employees | |
Nine major law firms | Legal services worth: $940 million |
The Trump administration, for causes like assisting veterans and law enforcement, ensuring fairness in the justice system and combating antisemitism |
Paul Weiss | $40 million | |
Skadden | $100 million | |
Willkie | $100 million | |
Milbank | $100 million | |
Cadwalader | $100 million | |
Kirkland & Ellis | $125 million | |
Latham & Watkins | $125 million | |
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | $125 million | |
A&O Shearman | $125 million |
The universities have taken varied approaches to their payments. Columbia agreed to pay a fine to the federal government. Brown’s payment will go to Rhode Island work force development programs, which the university’s president has said are aligned with their service and community engagement missions.
Critics have likened Mr. Trump’s methods of extracting money from these entities to extortion.
The law firms have faced internal backlash and external criticism for promising to pour resources into causes favored by the president. Shortly after the deals with them were signed, Mr. Trump publicly suggested that he might use their labor to achieve more of his own goals, including in the negotiations of trade deals or even representing him personally.
Other businesses, including Nvidia and Intel, have been drawn into making financial deals with the Trump administration in order to continue doing business or to sell their products to China. The specific details of most of those deals have not been made public.
2. Redefining discrimination
On his first day in office, Mr. Trump signed executive orders gutting racial equity policies and protections for transgender people. Those themes, along with addressing antisemitism and targeting international students, were evident in many of these agreements.
No “unlawful D.E.I. goals”: Columbia and Brown agreed to eliminate programs that aim to achieve diversity goals. (Both universities had already eliminated race-conscious affirmative action following a June 2023 Supreme Court decision outlawing it.) They promised to rely more on quantitative measures, instead of demographics, in their admissions practices.
Columbia University
“… shall maintain merit-based admissions policies. Columbia may not, by any means, unlawfully preference applicants based on race, color, or national origin in admissions throughout its programs. No proxy for racial admission will be implemented or maintained.”
Experts say relying on test scores and grades in admissions could result in wealthier, less diverse student populations at these elite institutions.
Law firms were similarly subject to these rules in their hiring practices.
Skadden | Cadwalader | Kirkland & Ellis | Latham & Watkins | A&O Shearman | Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | Milbank | Willkie
“… affirms its commitment to merit-based hiring, promotion, and retention. Accordingly, the Firm will not engage in illegal DEI discrimination and preferences.”
Transgender students: The University of Pennsylvania has been central in the debate around transgender athletes, specifically because of Lia Thomas, a transgender swimmer who graduated in 2022 and held several of Penn’s swimming records. The school’s deal with Mr. Trump revoked her records and limited how transgender students may participate in its athletic programs.
University of Pennsylvania
“… will not allow male students to compete in any athletic program restricted to women, ensuring that only female students are eligible to compete as a member of women’s athletics.”
In this way, the university bowed to the administration’s new interpretation of Title IX, a law that until recently protected transgender athletes from sex discrimination in education.
Penn and the other universities also agreed to additional rules around single-sex facilities and medical services for transgender students.
Columbia University
“… will uphold its commitment to Title IX … by providing safe and fair opportunities for women including single-sex housing for women who request such housing and all-female sports, locker rooms, and showering facilities …”
Brown University
“… will not perform gender reassignment surgery or prescribe puberty blockers or hormones to any minor child for the purpose of aligning the child’s appearance with an identity that differs from his or her sex.”
According to Brown, the number of minors enrolled at the university is typically less than 10 percent of all first-year undergraduates; the campus does not have surgical facilities; and its doctors do not typically prescribe puberty blockers.
Fighting antisemitism: Columbia agreed to pay $21 million to a compensation fund to resolve alleged civil rights violations against its Jewish employees. It also agreed to a review of its regional studies programs, starting with the Middle East, to ensure that they are “comprehensive and balanced.” The agreement does not define how those terms will be applied.
The school will also appoint new faculty members who will have joint positions in both the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies and other departments, and add a student liaison to coordinate and advise on antisemitism issues.
Both Columbia’s and Brown’s agreements have provisions outlining support for Jewish life on campus.
Brown University
“… is committed to taking significant, proactive, effective steps to combat antisemitism and ensure a campus environment free from harassment and discrimination. These shall include actions to support a thriving Jewish community, research and education about Israel, and a robust Program in Judaic Studies, through outreach to Jewish Day School students to provide information about applying to Brown, resources for religiously observant Jewish community members, renewed partnerships with Israeli academics and national Jewish organizations, support for enhanced security at the Brown-RISD Hillel, and a convening of alumni, students, and faculty to celebrate 130 years of Jewish life at Brown in the 2025-2026 academic year.”
International students: Columbia’s agreement with the Trump administration outlines provisions on international students, including asking them their reasons for wanting to study in the United States and reducing the school’s reliance on international student enrollment. (Columbia has about 13,700 international students, about 38 percent of its total student body.)
Columbia University
“… will examine its business model and take steps to decrease financial dependence on international student enrollment. The reforms should be made durable by adoption of any necessary organizational and personnel changes.”
3. Government oversight
Through the deals with Columbia and Brown, the Trump administration also gained access to information about their applicants, including details on race, grades and test scores.
Columbia University | Brown University
“… shall provide … the United States with admissions data … showing both rejected and admitted students broken down by race, color, grade point average, and performance on standardized tests, in a form permitting appropriate statistical analyses by October 1 of each year …”
Both schools are also required to make anonymized information on enrolled students available to the public, including demographics and grade point averages of each class.
Columbia also agreed to pay for a monitor, approved by the school and the government, to ensure that both sides abide by their commitments. It must now also inform the Department of Homeland Security when an international student is arrested. (Universities were already required to inform Homeland Security when an international student was suspended or expelled.)
Brown agreed to hire an external organization to conduct a campus survey by the end of the year on the school’s climate for Jewish students.
Similarly, the law firms also agreed to hire outside counsel to ensure adherence.
Paul Weiss
“… will engage experts, to be mutually agreed upon within 14 days, to conduct a comprehensive audit of all of its employment practices …”
Willkie
“… will engage independent outside counsel to advise the Firm in confirming that employment practices are fully compliant with Law …”
4. Assessing ideology
Some of the law firms targeted by Mr. Trump were associated with lawyers who have previously investigated him, or who have worked closely with those who did. Other firms had prominent Democrats on staff, or employed people who frequently criticized the president.
To that end, in each of their agreements, the law firms agreed to work on a wider range of cases, regardless of the political affiliation of the lawyer or prospective client.
Paul Weiss
“… will take on a wide range of pro bono matters that represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints of our society, whether ‘conservative’ or ‘liberal.’”
Milbank
“… shall not deny representation to any clients on the basis of the political affiliation of the prospective client, or because of the opposition of any Government Official.”
Kirkland & Ellis | Latham & Watkins | A&O Shearman | Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
“… will not deny representation to clients … because of the personal political views of individual lawyers.”
In return for the concessions, Mr. Trump revoked his executive order against the law firm Paul Weiss that would have suspended its security clearances, restricted its access to federal buildings and threatened its contracts with the government. The eight other law firms struck deals pre-emptively to avoid being subject to similar executive orders.
For most of the universities, the administration restored hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding that it had previously frozen. It also closed pending investigations into the schools of antisemitism or alleged violations of civil rights. Both the presidents of Columbia and Brown have publicly stated that these deals preserve the schools’ academic freedom.
Brown University
Yes
Yes Yes
–
No
Columbia University
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
University of Pennsylvania
–
No
Yes
– No
–
No
Nine major law firms
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Concessions in deals with the Trump administration
What’s next
Like Harvard, four major law firms have fought back against the president instead of striking a deal. Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block all filed lawsuits, which resulted in federal judges temporarily blocking Mr. Trump’s executive orders targeting them. The administration has recently begun to appeal these rulings.
Several other law firms have been questioned by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on their hiring practices and potential discrimination against white candidates, raising concerns of threats from the White House.
The Trump administration has vowed to appeal the court’s ruling that its funding cuts against Harvard were illegal. It remains unclear whether the school will receive its money. Mr. Trump has also frozen federal funding to other universities, including Princeton, Cornell, Duke, Northwestern and the University of California, Los Angeles, setting the stage for potential negotiations. In August, the administration proposed that U.C.L.A. pay more than $1 billion to reach a settlement. This month, after a difficult tenure that included attacks from Republicans in Congress and funding cuts, the president of Northwestern resigned.
Several other schools are watching for funding cuts as they come under the scrutiny of the Department of Education and a government task force that says it is devoted to rooting out antisemitism.
Sources
This analysis is based on publicly available text pertaining to the agreements between the Trump administration and Brown University, Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, A&O Shearman, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, Cadwalader, Latham & Watkins, Kirkland & Ellis, Milbank, Willkie, Skadden and Paul Weiss.
-
Finance6 days ago
Reimagining Finance: Derek Kudsee on Coda’s AI-Powered Future
-
Business1 week ago
How Nexstar’s Proposed TV Merger Is Tied to Jimmy Kimmel’s Suspension
-
North Dakota5 days ago
Board approves Brent Sanford as new ‘commissioner’ of North Dakota University System
-
World1 week ago
Russian jets enter Estonia's airspace in latest test for NATO
-
Crypto4 days ago
Texas brothers charged in cryptocurrency kidnapping, robbery in MN
-
World4 days ago
Syria’s new president takes center stage at UNGA as concerns linger over terrorist past
-
Technology4 days ago
These earbuds include a tiny wired microphone you can hold
-
Culture4 days ago
Test Your Memory of These Classic Books for Young Readers