# Tags

HARVARD UNIVERSITY DEFIES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, BILLIONS IN FUNDING FROZEN

The Trump administration has frozen over $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts to Harvard University after the institution refused to comply with demands to limit activism on campus. This move marks the seventh time the administration has targeted an elite college, with six of the seven schools being Ivy League institutions. The demands, which Harvard President Alan Garber rejected, included broad government and leadership reforms, changes to admissions policies, auditing views on diversity, and stopping recognition of certain student clubs. The administration also called for “merit-based” admissions and hiring policies and a ban on face masks on campus, seemingly targeting pro-Palestinian protesters. “The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber said in a letter to the Harvard community. “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.” The government argued that universities have allowed antisemitism to go unchecked at campus protests, but Garber said Harvard has made extensive reforms to address the issue. He added that the demands are an attempt to regulate “intellectual conditions” at Harvard, violating the university’s First Amendment rights and exceeding government authority. “Harvard stood up today for the integrity, values, and freedoms that serve as the foundation of higher education,” said Anurima Bhargava, a Harvard alumnus who supported the university’s decision. “Harvard reminded the world that learning, innovation and transformative growth will not yield to bullying and authoritarian whims.” The move has sparked protests and a lawsuit from the American Association of University Professors, challenging the cuts. The plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration failed to follow required steps before cutting funds, including giving notice to the university and Congress. Other universities targeted by the Trump administration include Columbia, University of Pennsylvania, Brown, Princeton, Cornell, and Northwestern. Columbia initially acquiesced to the demands under the threat of billions in cuts. The funding freeze is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to pressure institutions to comply with its agenda.

SUPREME COURT REJECTS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S REQUEST TO FREEZE FOREIGN AID

In a 5-4 decision, the US Supreme Court has rejected the Trump administration’s request to keep billions of dollars in foreign aid approved by Congress frozen. The ruling, although not specifying when the funds must be released, allows lower courts to proceed with enforcing the release of the aid. The majority opinion, supported by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, noted that the lower courts should “clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order” since the deadline to spend the money had already passed. Justice Samuel Alito, one of the four conservative justices who dissented, expressed strong opposition to the ruling, calling it “stunning.” Alito argued that a federal court should not overstep its authority by enforcing the release of the funds. The case revolves around billions in foreign aid allocated by Congress through the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The Trump administration froze the funds in January, citing efforts to cut spending and realign foreign aid with its policy agenda. Nonprofit groups that rely on the funding for global health and other programs challenged the administration’s move, arguing that it usurped Congress’s power to control government spending and violated federal law. The Supreme Court’s decision has been hailed by Democrats as a reaffirmation of congressional authority over federal spending. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York stated, “That money had already been appropriated, things were already in action, and so I think the Supreme Court ruled the right way, and now the administration needs to unfreeze them and allow those contractors and the work to be done”.

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S BID TO DENY CITIZENSHIP TO CHILDREN OF UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS

A federal judge has dealt a significant blow to the Trump administration’s immigration agenda, ruling that its attempt to deny citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants is unconstitutional. The decision, which cites a landmark 1898 case, reaffirms the principle of birthright citizenship enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution. According to the amendment, adopted in 1868 to ensure former slaves received citizenship and equal protection under the law, “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” This provision guarantees automatic citizenship to anyone born on US soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. The judge’s ruling is a major setback for the Trump administration’s immigration initiatives, which have faced widespread criticism for perceived discrimination and constitutional violations. The decision underscores the enduring principle that birthright citizenship is a fundamental entitlement safeguarded by the US Constitution. This ruling is likely to have significant implications for the administration’s immigration policies, which have been marked by controversy and legal challenges. The Trump administration has sought to restrict immigration and tighten border control, but its efforts have been met with resistance from civil rights groups, immigration advocates, and the courts.