President Donald Trump has escalated his ongoing conflict with Harvard University, launching a series of actions aimed at diminishing the institution’s funding and its student body diversity initiatives.
His administration has attempted to hinder the enrollment of international students at the Ivy League school and imposed a freeze on federal funding. The administration’s repeated threats to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status have drawn criticism, with many viewing these measures as politically motivated efforts to challenge the university’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion
Last month, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) introduced its Civil Rights Fraud Initiative, which could potentially be used against Harvard and other similar institutions through enforcement of the federal False Claims Act (FCA).
To shed light on these legal maneuvers, Arun Rath, host of All Things Considered, spoke with John P. Relman and Zoila Hinson, partners at the civil rights law firm Relman Colfax. They discussed the implications of the FCA in this context and the broader ramifications for higher education.
Relman explained that the intensified scrutiny on Harvard is part of a larger campaign by the Trump administration against universities perceived as overly liberal or ‘woke.’ The situation began with targeted criticisms of Columbia University and later shifted to Harvard, fueled by claims that the institution has failed to adequately address issues of anti-Semitism on campus while allegedly implementing discriminatory Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies in admissions and hiring processes.
Earlier this year, President Trump threatened to cut off federal funding to Harvard unless the university complied with his administration’s demands to relinquish control over its academic governance and content. When Harvard refused to cede this control while still expressing willingness to discuss the government’s concerns, the administration responded swiftly, cutting all federal funding within hours.
The potential financial impact on Harvard is immense, with cuts amounting to billions of dollars, affecting crucial medical and scientific research that benefits millions.
In response to the funding threat, Harvard promptly sought a court injunction to freeze the government’s actions until a ruling could be made. They were granted a temporary restraining order, with a hearing scheduled for July. Relman noted that due to the existential nature of the threat to Harvard, it is crucial for the court to expedite the ruling process, particularly with a new academic year approaching.
As the legal tussle unfolds, the Trump administration has escalated its tactics, challenging Harvard’s ability to enroll international students. Harvard officials have stated that without these students, their university experience would be significantly diminished, emphasizing the importance of global exchange in higher education.
Hinson then pivoted the conversation to the False Claims Act, which has its roots in the post-Civil War era and was primarily designed to combat fraud targeting the government by war profiteers.
Despite its traditional application, the False Claims Act has hardly ever been used against universities. Historically, it has targeted government contractors and providers who submit fraudulent claims, creating civil liability for those who knowingly present false claims for federal payments.
The context around the Trump administration’s use of the False Claims Act against Harvard revolves around prior claims where institutions certified compliance with federal civil rights laws in relation to federal funding. The DOJ asserts that claims submitted by Harvard are false based on the premise that the university’s DEI programs and support for trans rights conflict with federal law. Therefore, they argue, if Harvard receives federal funds under those circumstances, they are violating the False Claims Act.
Hinson pointed out that while there may be isolated instances where the FCA could apply to universities, the context in which the Trump administration is attempting to use it appears highly politicized.
The legal arguments against Harvard, she says, lack substantive grounding as courts have not established precedent indicating that DEI programs are illegal. Moreover, the Department of Justice would have to demonstrate that Harvard acted with knowledge that its claims were false to establish liability under the FCA.
She expressed skepticism regarding the government’s ability to meet this burden of proof, emphasizing that the university had been transparent about its DEI initiatives, which had previously aligned with government approval. Hinson noted that the ability to prove material falsity or knowledge of false claims becomes much weaker in this context when the funding agency has consistently made payments while aware of the university’s policies.
Relman and Hinson outlined the potential implications of such legal actions not just for Harvard, but for higher education institutions and others that receive federal funding. As universities navigate these turbulent waters, the outcome of this legal conflict could set a precedent affecting funding, governance, and compliance with federal civil rights laws across the educational landscape.
The growing scrutiny and politicization of the funding mechanisms utilized by the government may signal a more hostile environment for educational institutions, particularly those that hold diverse values in contrast to the current administration’s ideology.
These developments highlight the complex intersection of law, education funding, and political considerations, portending significant challenges for institutions striving to uphold their educational missions amid external pressures.
As the situation evolves, it will be crucial to monitor how the courts interpret these actions and what legal precedents emerge from this unprecedented use of the False Claims Act against higher education institutions.
Ultimately, this legal battle raises profound questions about the future of academic freedom, federal funding, and the role of diversity in educational environments.
image source from：https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2025-06-16/the-trump-administration-could-try-to-weaponize-the-false-claims-act-against-harvard-university
