Harvard rejecting $2 billion in federal grant money is apparently right up there with Cory Booker’s inconsequential Senate speech in terms of powerful opposition to Trump, so let’s talk about it.
The university’s president, Alan Garber, on Monday published an open letter announcing that the institution would not be accepting the money under the Trump administration’s terms, laid out in the government’s own letter last week. “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” wrote Garber in the missive, which earned him a pat on the head from podcaster Michelle Obama’s husband.
“Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions — rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom,” wrote former President Obama on X.
Take your wins where you can get them, I guess, but it’s unclear exactly what Democrats, Harvard, or anyone else gained here. The university has now forfeited billions of dollars that, by Garber’s own admission, would have enabled it to contribute not only to “the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation.” And for what?
The letter that the government sent to Harvard last week was admittedly stacked with a catalogue of stipulations that would have to be satisfied for the school to get the money, though the requirements were hardly outside the bounds of what Harvard would surely say is already in place.
The administration insisted that the university cease all race-based “diversity, equity, and inclusion” programs in administration and admissions; enact policies that promote ideological “viewpoint diversity”; and institute disciplinary policies to address students and faculty who violate the requirements, as well as any other university rules and standards.
There were some other mandates, like the stipulation that administrators reassert their control of campus protests — which shouldn’t even need to be stated — but much of academia has become less about learning and more about political agitating, so it did.
Arguably, though, the only additional burden placed on the university by the administration was in giving the government rights to audit the school and its affiliates to ensure compliance with the agreement. It’s well established by now that institutions controlled by anti-democratic leftists have trouble with accountability, but, hey — that’s the bargain. Unlike past presidents, this one isn’t simply pushing taxpayer dollars to already well-funded universities purely as an adherence to Washington “norms.”
But as we’ve seen before, it’s often more important to Democrats and institutions like Harvard to pick a losing fight, so long as it puts them at odds with the president. They claim to oppose government waste and then devote every fiber of their being to ensuring not one dollar is cut from the federal bureaucracy. They pretend to support sensible immigration enforcement and then spend what has now been a month demanding foreign nationals with deportation orders be brought back to the U.S. Now Harvard says it will forego money supposedly crucial to its academic research and global advancement, and Democrats applaud it as an act of brave defiance.
Whatever you say, sweaty!
If it’s a win for Harvard to reject billions in taxpayer dollars, here’s to more wins all around.
Source link