Connect with us

World

Harvard’s $2.3bn gamble: What Trump demanded; how the university resisted

Published

on

Harvard’s .3bn gamble: What Trump demanded; how the university resisted

United States President Donald Trump’s campaign to pressure universities into dropping diversity, equity and inclusion measures and punishing student protesters has faced its strongest pushback yet when Harvard University rejected a series of demands from his administration.

Monday’s decision quickly prompted the US Department of Education to freeze nearly $2.3bn in federal funding for the Ivy League institution ranked among the best universities in the US.

So what happened between Harvard and Trump, and why did the institution risk billions of dollars to go against the administration’s demands?

What did the Trump administration ask Harvard to do?

The heads of the US Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, and the General Services Administration co-signed a letter to Harvard on Friday. In this letter, they claimed “Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment.”

This was followed by a list of demands for the university in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to fulfil. Key among them were:

Advertisement
  • Promoting faculty committed to the Trump administration’s demands of Harvard, as articulated in the letter, and “reducing the power” of faculty and administrators “more committed to activism than scholarship”.
  • Ending all affirmative action in faculty hiring and student admissions by August. At the same time, the letter demanded that the university ensure “viewpoint diversity” by abolishing criteria during admissions and hiring processes “that function as ideological litmus tests”.
  • Changing the admissions process “to prevent admitting international students hostile to the American values”, including “students supportive of terrorism or anti-Semitism”. The letter did not define what it meant by “American values”. For the 2024-2025 academic year, there were 6,793 international students at Harvard, making up 27.2 percent of its total enrolment – up from less than 20 percent in 2006-2007.
  • Changing disciplinary policies and forbidding the recognition and funding of student groups or clubs that promote “criminal activity, illegal violence, or illegal harassment”.
  • Implementing a comprehensive mask ban with immediate, serious penalties for violation “not less than suspension” after some students have protested while wearing masks. The letter did not list any exceptions to this rule, such as health reasons.
  • Closing all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programmes and offices and carrying out organisational reform to ensure transparency with federal regulators.

Harvard was given a deadline of August to implement these changes. This is the second letter issued by the Trump administration to Harvard. The first one was issued on April 3 and called on Harvard to ban face masks and reform academic departments that it alleged were guilty of anti-Semitic bias. Charges of anti-Semitism have been levelled against numerous US universities and colleges since widespread campus protests were held against the war in Gaza.

How did Harvard respond to the demands?

Harvard’s lawyers responded to the Trump administration by saying the university rejected the demands, arguing they violated its First Amendment rights and freedoms recognised by the US Supreme Court. The US Constitution’s First Amendment upholds the rights to free speech, expression and assembly.

The university said Harvard strongly opposes anti-Semitism and continues to make structural changes to ensure that the institution is a welcoming and supportive learning environment for all students.

The university also published a separate letter online signed by President Alan Garber on Monday. In the letter, Garber said federal grants have led to research and innovation in fields pertaining to science and medicine. “These innovations have made countless people in our country and throughout the world healthier and safer,” he wrote.

The letter then referred to how the government had threatened to pull federal funding from several universities, including Harvard, over allegations of anti-Semitism on campus. The letter said the government retreating from its funding agreements with higher education institutions “risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation”.

The Harvard letter said that while some of the government’s demands are aimed at combating anti-Semitism, “the majority represent direct governmental regulation of the ‘intellectual conditions’ at Harvard.”

Advertisement

“The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber added.

The Harvard chapter of the American Association of University Professors filed a lawsuit on Friday in a federal court in Boston, accusing the Trump administration of “unlawful and unprecedented misuse of federal funding and civil rights enforcement authority to undermine academic freedom and free speech on a university campus”.

What is the backdrop to this standoff?

In January 2024, Garber had set up presidential task forces on campus to combat anti-Semitism and fight bias against Muslims and Arabs as Israel’s war on Gaza raged, igniting tensions on campuses around the world, including in the US.

In April 2024, pro-Palestine protesters set up an encampment on the Harvard campus, called Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP). The protesters demanded that Harvard divest from weapons companies and companies associated with Israel.

At that time, Garber said HOOP had disrupted educational activities on campus. In May, the university and protesters said they had reached an agreement to end the encampment, but the two parties gave different accounts about the terms of this agreement.

Advertisement

While the student protesters said Harvard had agreed to their demands, the university said it had only opened itself to dialogue on the demands. For example, pertaining to the students’ demand for the university to divest from companies with ties to Israel, Harvard said it had agreed to be more transparent with its students about how its endowment works.

How much federal funding could Harvard lose?

On Monday, hours after Harvard’s response, a task force created by the US Department of Education to tackle anti-Semitism released a statement announcing that  $2.3bn in federal funding to the university had been frozen.

“Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges – that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws,” the statement said. The frozen federal funds to Harvard include $2.2bn in grants and $60m in contracts, the statement added.

However, more money is at stake – about $9bn. On March 31, the Education Department, Department of Health and Human Services and the General Services Administration released a statement warning they would review $255.6m in contracts between the federal government and Harvard and its affiliates. The statement added that they would also review more than $8.7bn in multiyear grant commitments to Harvard and its affiliates.

Harvard’s endowment amounted to $53.2bn in the 2024 fiscal year — the largest of any university. However, donors decide which programmes, departments and purposes 70 percent of the annual endowment distribution is spent on. Endowment donations also dropped by $151m in 2024 as several billionaire donors stopped funding the institution over its response to concerns over anti-Semitism on campus, the university’s student-run newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, reported in October.

Advertisement

How have things unfolded at other US universities?

While Harvard is the first university to reject the Trump administration’s demands, it is not the first Ivy League school to be targeted.

Last year, Columbia University in New York emerged as the epicentre of pro-Palestine campus protests. Protesters occupied a campus building, Hamilton Hall, on April 30. The university called in the New York Police Department to crack down on student protesters.

In February, the Trump administration pulled back Columbia’s federal funding, worth $400m, citing the institution’s “failure to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment”. In March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia graduate and protest leader who had negotiated with the university during the campus demonstrations. Days earlier, the US Department of State revoked the visa of Ranjani Srinivasan, who was an urban planning doctoral candidate at Columbia. Soon after, Columbia unenrolled Srinivasan, who flew to Canada before she could be deported.

On March 13, the government’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism issued a letter to Columbia with nine demands for negotiations to restore the funding that was pulled. On March 18, Columbia accepted the government’s demands, listed in a new memo. The memo said protesting students will have to present university identification if prompted. It added that face masks would be banned if they are being used to conceal a person’s identity. However, face coverings are still allowed for religious or medical reasons. The memo also added that Columbia had hired 36 security officers who have special powers to arrest students, and the university continues to rely on New York police for additional security assistance.

Over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has suspended or frozen funding for Princeton, Cornell and Northwestern universities. The universities have responded by expressing frustration and highlighting how federal funding is important for critical research.

Advertisement

On April 11, the US Department of Energy, which funds research at many universities, announced a universal cap on the indirect costs it would finance for projects it supports. The agency said this would save the government $405m a year.

Nine universities and three bodies representing higher education institutions have since filed a lawsuit challenging that cap. The plaintiffs in the case include the Association of American Universities, American Council on Education, Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities, Brown University, California Institute of Technology, Cornell University, Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the regents of the University of Michigan, Board of Trustees of Michigan State University, the trustees of Princeton University and the University of Rochester.

What are the reactions to Harvard’s dispute with Trump?

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders congratulated Harvard on X on Monday “for refusing to relinquish its constitutional rights to Trump’s authoritarianism”.

Former US President Barack Obama posted on Tuesday: “Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions – rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom.”

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey posted a statement on X congratulating Harvard for “standing against the Trump Administration’s brazen attempt to bully schools and weaponize the US Department of Justice under the false pretext of civil rights”.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

World

Walt Disney Animation Studios World Premieres Whimsy & Talent Exhibition at 20th Animayo Gran Canaria Festival (EXCLUSIVE)

Published

on

Walt Disney Animation Studios World Premieres Whimsy & Talent Exhibition at 20th Animayo Gran Canaria Festival (EXCLUSIVE)

Walt Disney Animation Studios is paying tribute to female talent in art and animation at a one-of-a-kind exhibition during the Gran Canaria-based Animayo, Spain’s only Oscar-qualifying animation festival. From May 7-10, the exhibition Whimsy & Wonder will be exclusively on display at the fest.

Disney, an official sponsor this year, will celebrate the female artists who helped shape Disney’s visual storytelling for more than a hundred years. These include the trailblazing Mary Blair, who transformed the use of color in the 1950s, and the visionary women behind modern favorites like “Frozen,” “Encanto” and “Moana 2.” The exhibition is a homage to the women who have shaped the past—and are defining the future—of animation.

Art for ‘Encanto’ by Lorelay Bové

In the 1940s and ’50s, Blair (1911–1978, American), a celebrated color stylist and art director, brought a bold new vision to Disney animation. Her imaginative use of vibrant colors and whimsical shapes sparked a transformative shift in the studio’s style during the mid-20th century.

Whimsy & Wonder will offer a glimpse into the creative contributions of talented visual development and storytelling artists at Walt Disney Animation Studios, from films like “The Princess and the Frog” (2009) to Disney Animation’s most recent animated feature, “Moana 2” (2024).

Advertisement

Costume Design for Disney’s ‘Frozen 2’ by Brittney Lee (visual development artist).

The exhibition will showcase works by Blair and from six extraordinary artists at Walt Disney Animation Studios:

  • Lorelay Bové (Spain/Andorra): Visual development artist on “Big Hero 6,”” Zootopia,” “Wreck-It Ralph,”” The Princess and the Frog” and associate production designer of Oscar-winner “Encanto.” Bové will also be present at Animayo to give a Masterclass and participate in an exclusive portfolio review session.
  • Lisa Keene: Production designer and visual development artist on “Wish,” “Frozen” and classics such as “Beauty and the Beast” and “The Lion King.”
  • Brittney Lee: Production designer and visual development artist, renowned for her iconic costume design for Elsa in “Frozen” and the interior of Elsa’s ice palace.
  • Griselda Sastrawinata-Lemay: Visual development artist on “Encanto”,” Moana,” “Raya and the Last Dragon” and associate production designer on “Wish.”
  • Josie Trinidad: Emmy-winning director and head of story on “Zootopia” and “Ralph Breaks the Internet.”
  •  Fawn Veerasunthorn: Director of “Wish” and head of story on “Raya and the Last Dragon.”

Exhibition takes place in the Manolo Millares & Elvireta Escobio hall at the Centro de Iniciativas de La Fundación La Caja de Canarias, CICCA, which is also a sponsor of the fest.

Led by founder-director-producer Damián Perea, Animayo Gran Canaria 2025 will bring together more than 40 distinguished speakers and special guests, featuring artists, creators, and experts from prominent studios, production companies and academic institutions from around the world.

Expressing delight at the fact that Walt Disney Animation Studios chose Animayo to present this unique exhibition on the occasion of the festival’s 20th anniversary, Perea said: “The Walt Disney Animation Research Library has curated a one-of-a-kind exhibition that spans over a century of artistic inspiration. Without a doubt, it will be an inspiration for many of the girls and young women attending the festival, who will feel empowered by the six incredible female artists showcased in this exhibition.”

As it celebrates 20 years of creativity and impact in the Canary Islands, a burgeoning animation hub, this premiere marks a milestone for Animayo, the only Oscar-qualifying festival in Spain. Iran’s “In the Shadow of the Cypress,” winner of Animayo’s Best International Short Film prize in 2024, went on to win best animated short at the 97th Academy Awards this year.

Advertisement

The festival’s growing roster of sponsors are led by the Cabildo of Gran Canaria through the Presidency Department, the Society for the Promotion of the City of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, the Department of Tourism, Industry and Commerce of the Government of the Canary Islands through Promotur and from the Canary Islands Institute for Cultural Development (ICDC), Gran Canaria Tourism, the La Caja de Canarias Foundation, and the Government of the Canary Islands. Animayo also relies on the participation of several production companies, studios, schools, and universities.

Concept Art for ‘Raya and the Last Dragon’ by Griselda Sastrawinata-Lemay (visual development artist)

Continue Reading

World

UN cash app for Gazans exploited by Hamas as terror group steals aid money meant for civilians

Published

on

UN cash app for Gazans exploited by Hamas as terror group steals aid money meant for civilians

United Nations agencies’ monthly cash transfers to Gaza residents are inadvertently strengthening the Hamas terrorist organization, as the group and affiliated traders continue to control the money flow to the enclave, an expert on Hamas’ financial and economic operations said.

“Hamas exploits its role as the de facto ruler of Gaza to extract financial gains from aid money sent by U.N. organizations to civilians via apps still operating in the region,” Eyal Ofer told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

“The aid system is being manipulated by Hamas and affiliated traders. Hamas does this largely behind the scenes, leveraging their control over large merchants, crime families, and using cash to establish a shadow banking system within Gaza.”

HOW ISRAEL’S WAR AGAINST HAMAS TERRORISTS WILL BE DIFFERENT UNDER TRUMP

Gazans at a bazaar set up to meet their basic needs amidst the rubble in the heavily damaged Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza on the 3rd day of Ramadan, after Israel halted humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, on March 3, 2025.  (Mahmoud Issa/Anadolu via Getty Images))

Each month, international organizations send significant sums into Gaza’s economy. The U.N.’s World Food Programme (WFP) transfers approximately $18.43 million, reaching 82,636 families, with each family receiving an average of $209, according to open-source data. UNICEF’s monthly assistance averages $5 million, helping to reach at least 20,000 families every month. 

“I go to the market and meet people whose job is to provide cash in exchange for a fee,” Gaza resident Shahab Yousef told Israel’s news agency TPS-IL. “The fee is 20–30%. If I transfer 1,000 shekels [$271] I get back 700 [$190],” he said. “For big purchases, I pay digitally. But at the market, I need cash, and I lose 30 percent every time.”

Advertisement

Another Gaza resident, Nidal Qawasmeh, expressed similar frustration to TPS-IL. “These people are charging 30 percent just to give you cash. I just want to take care of my family, but everything costs me more because of this. Prices are insane.”

The specific amount received per family every month is around $270 (or 1,000 New Israeli Shekels), which was calculated as 80% of the Survival Minimum Expenditure Basket, UNICEF told Fox News Digital. Smaller organizations like UNFPA and others also contribute, bringing the total to about $39.66 million per month, reaching 60% of Gaza’s households, according to open-source data.

Gaza money changer

A man holds a wad of Israeli shekels in Gaza. (Majdi Fathi/TPS)

Despite the scale of direct financial aid, which reaches over half of the enclave’s population, Gaza’s severe food insecurity and high inflation (91% and 118%, respectively, as of January 2024) underscore its importance. However, the way this money circulates within Gaza is far more complex. “Hamas controls much of the cash that enters Gaza through various channels,” Ofer told Fox News Digital, “People who receive money via mobile apps must convert it into cash to use in local markets, but this involves hefty fees, with many money changers tied to Hamas or its allies.”

TPS-IL reported that Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently warned that Hamas’s economic strength in Gaza relies on billions of shekels in cash, paid as salaries and quickly reclaimed through taxes on merchants. In a letter to Bank of Israel Governor Prof. Amir Yaron, Sa’ar urged the cancelation of the circulation of 200-shekel bills previously introduced into Gaza, saying that experts believe the move would severely damage Hamas’s financial network. The Bank of Israel rejected the proposal, citing technical reasons and claiming that implementation was not feasible.

Ofer’s research found that the fees can range from 20% to 35%, meaning recipients lose a significant portion of their aid just to access it. “In videos from Gaza, you can see traders refusing to accept app funds and forcing customers to convert them into cash, knowing they will lose at least 20% in the process,” he said.

Advertisement

Peter Gallo, an international lawyer and former Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) investigator at the U.N., told Fox News Digital, “If an investigator in Israel can figure it out, the aid agencies either knew or should have known. Twenty to thirty percent is just ridiculous. That’s extortion. It’s what some have politely described as a ‘revolutionary tax.’ In fairness, the aid agencies might argue they had no alternative, It is the cost of doing business, but it would have been better if they were honest about it from the start.”

HAMAS TERROR GROUP REPORTEDLY BUCKLING UNDER FINANCIAL STRAIN AMID ISRAELI MILITARY GAINS AND GROWING UNREST

Jabilia, Gaza

Palestinians shop for food and clothes at the local bazaar as daily life continues in the shadow of war in Jabalia, Gaza, on January 15, 2024. (Photo by Mahmoud Shalha/Anadolu via Getty Images) (Photo by Mahmoud Shalha/Anadolu via Getty Images)

A spokesperson for UNICEF told Fox News Digital, “UNICEF is aware of the cash liquidity crisis in Gaza and the continuous shortage of hard cash, which is a direct consequence of the banking system’s inability to function amid the ongoing conflict.

“Since May 2024, UNICEF has introduced fully digital cash payments via e-wallets, which do not require hard cash at any point. By using e-wallets, recipients of humanitarian digital cash transfers can purchase goods such as food, hygiene items and medicine without ever handling physical money,” the spokesperson said.

“The use of digital e-wallets can be accessed through an app and works on the most basic smartphones. When implemented, these digital cash payments via e-wallets eliminate the need for cash conversion and, consequently, the payment of any fees. The UNICEF humanitarian digital cash program adheres to the highest standards of neutrality and impartiality. No external party, actor, or agency—not even the beneficiaries themselves—has any role or influence in the design or implementation of the program, including the composition of the beneficiary list, payment schedule, frequency and amounts.”

Advertisement
World Food Programme (WFP) aid at the Erez west crossing on the Israel-Gaza border.

World Food Programme (WFP) aid at the Erez west crossing on the Israel-Gaza border. (IDF spokesman)

The spokesperson claimed: “More than 1.8 million people—close to the entire population of Gaza—are grappling with extreme food insecurity, with at least half of them being children. . . . Acute malnutrition among children is rising at alarming rates. The UNICEF humanitarian cash transfer program is, simply put, keeping children alive in the midst of a war not of their making by providing them with access to essential items for their survival. UNICEF’s monthly budget for humanitarian cash transfers in Gaza averages USD 5 million to support approximately 20,000 families. We estimate that these parameters are too small to significantly impact the local economy.”

The World Food Programme didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, said, “This is yet another example of Hamas showing a complete disregard for the people of Gaza – and exploiting systems and infrastructure to sustain their murderous terror machine.”

“Turning a blind eye is not acceptable. The U.N. Security Council has been addressing terrorist financing since 2001, yet aid agencies continue to ignore the fact that Hamas is making a profit off this money flow, despite international efforts to stop terrorist financing,” Gallo said.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

World

Greenland’s PM Nielsen says the US has 'not been respectful'

Published

on

Greenland’s PM Nielsen says the US has 'not been respectful'
ADVERTISEMENT

New Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated on Sunday that US comments regarding the mineral-rich Arctic island had been disrespectful, emphasising that Greenland “will never, ever be a piece of property that can be bought by just anyone.”

His comments came after a meeting with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at her official residence on Sunday, on the second day of a three-day official visit.

Nielsen’s remarks were in response to US President Donald Trump’s repeated state interest in taking control of the strategically important territory.

During the press conference, Nielsen said “the talk from the United States have not been respectful.”

He continued, “the words used have not been respectful. That’s why we need in this situation, we need to stand together.”

Greenlandic political parties, which have been advocating for eventual independence from Denmark for years, recently formed a broad-based coalition government in response to Trump’s ambitions regarding the territory.

Advertisement

The Greenlandic government stated that Nielsen’s three-day visit, which began on Saturday, was aimed at fostering future cooperation between the two nations.

“Denmark has the will to invest in Greenlandic society, and we don’t just have that for historical reasons. We also have that because we are part of (the Danish) commonwealth with each other,” said Frederiksen.

“We of course have a will to also continue investing in Greenlandic society,” she continued.

Nielsen is scheduled to meet King Frederik X on Monday, before returning to Greenland with Frederiksen for a royal visit to the island.

When asked whether a meeting between them and Trump was in the works, Frederiksen responded, “We always want to meet with the American president. Of course we want to. But I think we have been very, very clear in what is the (Danish commonwealth’s) approach to all parts of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

Advertisement

Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark.

Video editor • Lucy Davalou

Continue Reading

Trending