In a heated dispute with the Trump administration, Harvard University has filed a lawsuit seeking to reverse significant funding cuts imposed last month by the Department of Defense, which terminated various grants and contracts related to military research projects involving Harvard researchers.
These funding cuts were communicated to Harvard on May 12, the day after the Pentagon initiated the terminations, as revealed by a memorandum presented by Harvard’s legal team in federal court in Boston on Monday.
Notably, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) director of contracting urgently urged her superiors to reconsider the cuts due to their impact on the AMPHORA program, which addresses emerging biological threats and involves multiple institutions.
The director highlighted that Harvard’s research team is currently the top performer on the AMPHORA program, having reached a “critical juncture” in their work, which is said to outpace the current state-of-the-art technologies and offer significant advances for military capabilities.
She cautioned that a lack of understanding of the biological threat landscape could pose serious risks to national security.
The funding cancellations, ordered by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have drawn sharp criticism, with Harvard’s legal representatives describing the cuts as part of an “extreme and retaliatory strategy” employed by the Trump administration as punishment for the university’s refusal to comply with extensive federal demands issued to Harvard officials in April.
These demands sought to place Harvard’s admissions practices, hiring protocols, and certain academic divisions under federal oversight, prompting accusations from the Trump administration that the institution failed to protect Jewish students from discrimination, and demonstrated bias against white individuals and men in its admissions and hiring practices.
Josh Gruenbaum, a figure on the Trump administration’s antisemitism task force and an official at the General Services Administration, stated that due to what he characterized as alarming civil rights issues at Harvard, the administration decided to discontinue collaborations with the university for the time being.
Compounding the matter, Harvard’s legal team revealed that the funding cuts also affected programs funded by other federal agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, and Health and Human Services.
According to the documentation filed in court, the Trump administration’s funding terminations included projects researching tuberculosis, a chip designed to measure astronauts’ radiation exposure during the upcoming Artemis II mission, and research focused on Lou Gehrig’s disease.
Harvard is seeking a summary judgment from US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs to expedite the reversal of these funding cuts before a Sept. 3 deadline, beyond which the terminations would become final and potentially irreversible.
In their filing, Harvard’s lawyers argued that the administration’s actions present an unacceptable trade-off: either submit to federal control over academic governance and values or risk losing all federal funding.
Legal experts, including those who typically support Trump administration policies, are warning that certain aspects of this aggressive campaign against Harvard may infringe upon existing federal laws and regulations.
Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, acknowledged that while he agrees with some critiques regarding the need for greater ideological diversity at the institution, he remains skeptical about the administration’s ultimate motives.
Garber stated that characterizing the assault on Harvard’s research initiatives as a response to antisemitism raises questions regarding the true objectives of the administration.
While the university has made numerous adaptations to address allegations of antisemitism on campus, including changing protest enforcement measures and adopting a definition of antisemitism acknowledged by the Trump administration, it remains cautious about the motivations behind the funding cuts.
In summary, the legal battle marks a significant intersection of politics, academic freedom, and national security, underscoring broader tensions between the federal government and one of the country’s preeminent educational institutions.
image source from：https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/06/02/metro/harvard-grant-darpa-defense-department/
