Connect with us

News

Harvard would be smart to follow Hillsdale’s playbook. Trump should avoid Biden’s. | Opinion

Published

on

Harvard would be smart to follow Hillsdale’s playbook. Trump should avoid Biden’s. | Opinion


Harvard University doesn’t get a complete free pass in its fight with President Donald Trump – as the government aid which it has welcomed is paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

play

President Donald Trump isn’t wasting any time implementing his agenda. We’re not even 100 days into his second term, and it’s been busy to say the least.

Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would fight wokeness and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in government and education, and he’s following through.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has taken aim at some of the country’s top schools, including Columbia University and Harvard, attempting to force them to fall in line. Trump is particularly displeased – for good reason – with how these universities have failed to address antisemitism on their campuses as well as with a glaring lack of ideological diversity among faculty and programs. 

And Trump is using the cudgel of federal funding to get his way.

Advertisement

In March, Columbia made significant concessions after the administration withheld $400 million in funding. 

Trump’s latest target is Harvard, and the government has already frozen more than $2 billion in grants and contracts. Harvard, however, isn’t playing ball. 

“I think Harvard’s a disgrace,” Trump said April 17.

Even though Ivy League schools like Harvard and Columbia are private, the large sums of federal dollars that reach their campuses through student aid, grants and research funding always come with strings attached. 

Advertisement

If they don’t like what Trump is asking for, there’s an easy answer: Don’t take federal money. 

Michigan’s Hillsdale College offers a playbook other schools can follow. 

Hillsdale’s independence is tied to its freedom from government money 

Hillsdale, a small liberal arts institution, has made a big name for itself when decades ago it chose to eschew federal funding completely, including in the form of student aid, so that it didn’t have to bend to government demands and regulations. 

Grove City College in Pennsylvania has made a similar choice. 

Advertisement

And Hillsdale, my alma mater, is able to offer its students generous scholarships that make up for a lack of federal student loans. 

I know this from personal experience. I could not have afforded Hillsdale without the generosity of its donors, who believe strongly in the mission of the college. 

No doubt, Harvard, an extremely wealthy university with an enviable endowment (more than $50 billion), could find ways to supplant the federal funds if it so chose – at least until a more friendly (Democratic) president is back in the White House.

Advertisement

Harvard, however, seems defiant and unlikely to acquiesce to Trump.

In an open letter published April 14, Harvard President Alan Garber wrote that what the Trump administration wants “threatens our values as a private institution devoted to the pursuit, production, and dissemination of knowledge. 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.”

Yet, Harvard doesn’t get a complete free pass from federal interference – as the government aid it has welcomed is paid for by U.S. taxpayers. 

Trump shouldn’t make the same mistakes Obama and Biden did 

Trump doesn’t like to lose, and he’s not taking Harvard’s resistance well. He has threatened to withdraw the school’s tax-exempt status as well as interfere with the enrollment of international students, both of which would be a serious blow to the college’s bottom line. 

I caution the president, however, against falling into the playbooks used by his predecessors. 

Advertisement

Even though I’m sympathetic with Trump’s concerns, I’m wary of government heavy-handedness, regardless of which party it’s coming from. And free speech organizations like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression have warned against the Trump administration’s latest actions. 

FIRE raised similar concerns during both the Obama and Biden administrations when they sought to erode free speech rights and campus due process under the guise of enforcing Title IX. 

(That makes former President Barack Obama’s “concerns” over what Trump is doing now very hypocritical.)

Similarly, Trump should avoid going after Harvard’s tax-exempt status. Hillsdale faced a lawsuit recently that sought to use the nonprofit tax exemption as a way to get the college to bend to federal regulations by equating the exemption benefit with federal assistance. Luckily, the federal judge didn’t buy that argument. 

If Trump can withdraw Harvard’s tax exemption, a future president unfriendly to a conservative school like Hillsdale could similarly weaponize its tax status. 

Advertisement

It’s better not to go down that road at all.

In the meantime, if Harvard doesn’t want Trump telling it what to do, then it would be smart to follow Hillsdale’s model.

Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@usatoday.com or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques

Advertisement

News

Amazon accused of listing products from independent shops without permission

Published

on

Amazon accused of listing products from independent shops without permission

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Amazon has been accused of listing products from independent retailers without their consent, even as the ecommerce giant sues start-up Perplexity over its AI software shopping without permission.

The $2.5tn online retailer has listed some independent shops’ full inventory on its platform without seeking permission, four business owners told the Financial Times, enabling customers to shop through Amazon rather than buy directly.

Two independent retailers told the FT that they had also received orders for products that were either out of stock or were mispriced and mislabelled by Amazon leading to customer complaints.

Advertisement

“Nobody opted into this,” said Angie Chua, owner of Bobo Design Studio, a stationery store based in Los Angeles.

Tech companies are experimenting with artificial intelligence “agents” that can perform tasks like shopping autonomously based on user instructions.

Amazon has blocked agents from Anthropic, Google, OpenAI and a host of other AI start-ups from its website.

It filed a lawsuit in November against Perplexity, whose Comet browser was making purchases on Amazon on behalf of users, alleging that the company’s actions risked undermining user privacy and violated its terms of service.

In its complaint, Amazon said Perplexity had taken steps “without prior notice to Amazon and without authorisation” and that it degraded a customer shopping experience it had invested in over several decades.

Advertisement

Perplexity in a statement at the time said that the lawsuit was a “bully tactic” aimed at scaring “disruptive companies like Perplexity” from improving customers’ experience.

The recent complaints against Amazon relate to its “Buy for Me” function, launched last April, which lets some customers purchase items that are not listed with Amazon but on other retailers’ sites.

Retailers said Amazon did not seek their permission before sending them orders that were placed on the ecommerce site. They do not receive the user’s email address or other information that might be helpful for generating future sales, several sellers told the FT.

“We consciously avoid Amazon because our business is rooted in community and building a relationship with customers,” Chua said. “I don’t know who these customers are.”

Several of the independent retailers said Amazon’s move had led to poor experiences for customers, or hurt their business.

Advertisement

Sarah Hitchcock Burzio, the owner of Hitchcock Paper Co. in Virginia, said that Amazon had mislabelled items leading to a surge in orders as customers believed they were receiving more expensive versions of a product at a much lower price.

“There were no guardrails set up so when there were issues there was nobody I could go to,” she said.

Product returns and complaints for the “Buy for Me” function are handled by sellers rather than Amazon, even when errors are produced by the Seattle-based group.

Amazon enables sellers to opt out of the service by contacting the company on a specific email address.

Amazon said: “Shop Direct and Buy for Me are programmes we’re testing that help customers discover brands and products not currently sold in Amazon’s store, while helping businesses reach new customers and drive incremental sales.

Advertisement

“We have received positive feedback on these programmes. Businesses can opt out at any time.”

Continue Reading

News

Trump says Venezuela will turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of oil to US | CNN Business

Published

on

Trump says Venezuela will turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of oil to US | CNN Business

President Donald Trump said Tuesday night that Venezuela will turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of oil to the United States, to be sold at market value and with the proceeds controlled by the US.

Interim authorities in Venezuela will turn over “sanctioned oil” Trump said on Truth Social.

The US will use the proceeds “to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!” he wrote.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright has been directed to “execute this plan, immediately,” and the barrels “will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States.”

CNN has reached out to the White House for more information.

Advertisement

A senior administration official, speaking under condition of anonymity, told CNN that the oil has already been produced and put in barrels. The majority of it is currently on boats and will now go to US facilities in the Gulf to be refined.

Although 30 to 50 million barrels of oil sounds like a lot, the United States consumed just over 20 million barrels of oil per day over the past month.

That amount may lower oil prices a bit, but it probably won’t lower Americans’ gas prices that much: Former President Joe Biden released about four to six times as much — 180 million barrels of oil — from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve in 2022, which lowered gas prices by only between 13 cents and 31 cents a gallon over the course of four months, according to a Treasury Department analysis.

US oil fell about $1 a barrel, or just under 2%, to $56, immediately after Trump made his announcement on Truth Social.

Selling up to 50 million barrels could raise quite a bit of revenue: Venezuelan oil is currently trading at $55 per barrel, so if the United States can find buyers willing to pay market price, it could raise between $1.65 billion and $2.75 billion from the sale.

Advertisement

Venezuela has built up significant stockpiles of crude over since the United States began its oil embargo late last year. But handing over that much oil to the United States may deplete Venezuela’s own oil reserves.

The oil is almost certainly coming from both its onshore storage and some of the seized tankers that were transporting oil: The country has about 48 million barrels of storage capacity and was nearly full, according to Phil Flynn, senior market analyst at the Price Futures Group. The tankers were transporting about 15 million to 22 million barrels of oil, according to industry estimates.

It’s unclear over what time period Venezuela will hand over the oil to the United States.

The senior administration official said the transfer would happen quickly because Venezuela’s crude is very heavy, which means it can’t be stored for long.

But crude does not go bad if it is not refined in a certain amount of time, said Andrew Lipow, the president of Lipow Oil Associates, in a note. “It has sat underground for hundreds of millions of years. In fact, much of the oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been around for decades,” he wrote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: Nvidia Shows Off New A.I. Chip at CES

Published

on

Video: Nvidia Shows Off New A.I. Chip at CES

new video loaded: Nvidia Shows Off New A.I. Chip at CES

transcript

transcript

Nvidia Shows Off New A.I. Chip at CES

At the annual tech conference, CES, Nvidia showed off a new A.I. chip, known as Vera Rubin, which is more efficient and powerful than previous generations of chips.

This is the Vera CPU. This is one CPU. This is groundbreaking work. I would not be surprised if the industry would like us to make this format and this structure an industry standard in the future. Today, we’re announcing Alpamayo, the world’s first thinking, reasoning autonomous vehicle A.I.

Advertisement
At the annual tech conference, CES, Nvidia showed off a new A.I. chip, known as Vera Rubin, which is more efficient and powerful than previous generations of chips.

By Jiawei Wang

January 6, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending