Harvard Faces $2.26B Federal Funding Freeze Over Refusal to Dismantle DEI Programs and Limit Campus Protests

Edited by: Fern Sidman

In a dramatic escalation of tensions between the federal government and elite academia, the Trump administration announced on Monday that it is freezing $2.2 billion in federal grants and $60 million in contracts earmarked for Harvard University, after the school publicly rejected the administration’s demands to dismantle diversity programs and curtail protest activity on campus.

According to a report that appeared on Monday in The Epoch Times, the freeze comes just hours after Harvard President Alan Garber issued a defiant statement addressed to the university community, asserting that “the University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.” His message set the tone for a firm institutional stance against federal pressure to eliminate programs and policies tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as well as restrictions on student activism.

In a campus-wide statement, Garber pushed back against the administration’s demands, stating that the “majority” of the reforms constitute direct interference with Harvard’s intellectual autonomy. The Epoch Times quoted Garber as saying: “We have informed the administration through our legal counsel that we will not accept their proposed agreement.”

Shortly after President Garber’s announcement, the Department of Education’s Task Force on Anti-Semitism issued its own statement, justifying the funding freeze and accusing Harvard of displaying a “troubling entitlement mindset.” According to the information provided in The Epoch Times report, the task force criticized the university’s leadership for failing to recognize that federal investment must be contingent upon compliance with civil rights laws and the promotion of a non-discriminatory academic environment.

This confrontation is part of a wider campaign by the federal government to review and possibly restructure its financial relationships with elite institutions. Just two weeks ago, the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and the General Services Administration launched a sweeping investigation into nearly $9 billion in federal funds allocated to Harvard. This inquiry, as described by The Epoch Times, led to the delivery of an initial list of reform demands, which Harvard has thus far resisted.

Among the government’s requirements are the elimination of DEI initiatives, a ban on face coverings during protests, and significant changes to admissions and hiring policies—mandating a pivot toward merit-based criteria and away from considerations based on race or gender. Additionally, The Epoch Times report highlighted that the government’s conditions include full cooperation with Homeland Security and a mandate to initiate institutional restructuring, potentially involving leadership changes.

While the initial letter sent to Harvard on April 3 did not specify a compliance timeline, a follow-up letter dated April 11 issued a firm deadline of August 2025 for Harvard to complete the audit and implement required changes. According to The Epoch Times, this has placed enormous pressure on the university’s new president, Alan Garber, who formally assumed office in August 2024 following the resignation of Claudine Gay. Gay stepped down after intense public criticism over her congressional testimony on campus antisemitism and multiple plagiarism allegations.

Crucially, The Epoch Times reported that the government is also pushing for a radical overhaul of Harvard’s international admissions process, including the implementation of new protocols to screen out applicants who are “hostile to American values” or who hold views “supportive of terrorism or antisemitism.” In what may be the most controversial measure, the letter calls for an external audit of all departments, assessing viewpoint diversity among faculty, students, and administrators, with an emphasis on uncovering ideological imbalance or groupthink.

This federal action signals a potential watershed moment in U.S. higher education, where funding may become increasingly conditional on compliance with political and cultural expectations set by Washington, as was indicated in the report in The Epoch Times. For Harvard, the stakes are enormous—not just in terms of dollars, but in the fundamental question of whether the university can maintain institutional sovereignty while under public scrutiny for its political and cultural direction.

The Trump administration’s intensifying oversight of elite universities has entered a new phase with a targeted demand for a comprehensive audit of Harvard University’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, as part of a wider federal crackdown on ideological bias and insufficient safeguards against antisemitic harassment. According to The Epoch Times, the administration’s focus on this academic unit stems from concerns that the center has, in its current form, become a conduit for anti-Semitic sentiment and behavior, particularly in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led terrorist attacks on Israel.

As reported by The Epoch Times, the federal government’s demand for an audit comes amid a larger set of reform conditions attached to Harvard’s federal funding eligibility. In particular, the audit is to produce a report identifying any faculty who have discriminated against Jewish or Israeli students or encouraged students to defy Harvard’s institutional policies during the wave of campus protests that erupted across the country in response to the Gaza conflict.

The Department of Education, along with other federal agencies, has made it clear that they expect accountability measures to follow the audit. The Epoch Times report noted that the government has pledged to work with Harvard to determine “appropriate sanctions” for any faculty found in violation, while affirming that such action will remain “within the bounds of academic freedom and the First Amendment.”

The situation at Harvard mirrors similar pressure placed on Columbia University, which, as reported by The Epoch Times, is also undergoing a tri-agency review by the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and the General Services Administration. That investigation places nearly $5 billion in federal funding in jeopardy. Columbia received its initial warning in early March, followed by a decisive move by the federal government on March 7 to rescind $400 million in grants and contracts—a response to the university’s alleged failure to address antisemitism and discriminatory conduct on campus.

Within a week of receiving the ultimatum, Columbia agreed to nearly all of the administration’s demands, including structural reforms and enhanced oversight of its Middle Eastern studies program. However, The Epoch Times reported that the withheld federal funds have not yet been reinstated, keeping the university in a state of financial and legal limbo.

The crackdown has only intensified. Last week, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reportedly froze an additional $250 million in research funding to Columbia, compounding the financial pressure. This brings the total at-risk or frozen funding for Columbia to over $650 million, underlining the administration’s willingness to exert aggressive financial leverage in its broader campaign to enforce federal civil rights and anti-discrimination statutes.

As The Epoch Times report emphasized, the unfolding standoff between the federal government and the nation’s elite universities marks a critical inflection point. At stake are not only billions in research and institutional funding but also the very contours of academic freedom, the scope of federal authority, and the standards by which universities are judged in upholding their civil rights obligations.

With the August 2025 deadline looming and the administration standing firm, Harvard now faces a high-stakes decision: comply with the government’s sweeping demands — including potentially punitive audits of faculty and structural changes to entire departments — or risk becoming the latest academic powerhouse to fall under the shadow of federal defunding.