Harvard University says it will not comply with federal law — but it still expects to receive federal money.
On Monday, Harvard rejected the Department of Education’s demands to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to avoid a funding freeze. The department claims its demands — which include eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, adopting merit-based hiring and admissions, and enacting disciplinary reform — ensure a nondiscriminatory environment for all students. Harvard President Alan Garber cited academic freedom for rejecting these terms in an open letter to faculty and students.
“Freedom of thought and inquiry, along with the government’s longstanding commitment to respect and protect it, has enabled universities to contribute in vital ways to a free society and to healthier, more prosperous lives for people everywhere,” Garber wrote. “All of us share a stake in safeguarding that freedom.”
It is ironic that Harvard protests the freeze on First Amendment grounds. The university earned the dubious distinction of ranking dead last in the 2025 Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression rankings of 251 colleges and universities that described Harvard’s speech climate as “abysmal” due to high levels of self-censorship, draconian speech policing, and intolerance for speakers who expressed unapproved points of view. Casting itself as a defender of free speech while routinely stifling it on campus takes Ivy League-level chutzpah.
The Trump administration appropriately laughed off Harvard’s defiance, freezing more than $2.2 billion in federal funding before the sun set that day. The departments of Education and Health and Human Services, as well as the General Services Administration, are also scrutinizing a total of $8.7 billion in grants and more than $255 million in contracts between Harvard, its affiliates, and the federal government.
“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,” a government statement said. “It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support.”
But like a spoiled adolescent, Harvard wants its allowance without doing its chores. In anticipation of the funding freeze, a group of Harvard professors, with the university’s backing, filed a lawsuit in a Boston federal court against the Department of Education. It argues that the funding freeze violates free speech and academic freedom and that the administration’s demands, such as eliminating DEI programs and restricting protests, infringe on Harvard’s rights as a private institution. A federal judge could issue a decision within days on whether to grant a temporary restraining order to prevent the cuts.
There is, of course, a simpler solution available to Harvard: It could choose not to take federal money. Harvard’s reported endowment of $53.2 billion is the largest of any in the nation, which positions the university to carry on regular operations without $2.2 billion more in federal grants this year. Harvard’s investment returns alone, totaling $2.5 billion in fiscal 2023, cover the loss. The university also reports $1.3 billion in donations in fiscal 2024, a lower figure than in recent years due to the disruption it allowed on campus but still a healthy sum. Long term, Harvard could consider private-sector partnerships or international funding, though it will have to accept whatever strings come attached there too.
DEI POLICIES THREATEN MEDICAL EXCELLENCE
It could also take the route of Hillsdale College by becoming fully private, freeing the university from government regulations of any kind. Harvard’s massive endowment, brand power, and donor base make this transition feasible. But until it chooses to refuse taxpayer dollars, it must obey federal law. It is of course ludicrous to cite its independence while demanding to stay dependent on large subventions of taxpayer money.
It is a tragedy that universities that were for a long time symbols of American excellence have become bywords for entitlement, corruption, and decay. Harvard’s actions this week exemplify the rot in elite institutions.