The Trump administration is directing federal agencies to review Harvard University’s contracts and grants, potentially ending or redirecting funding as tensions escalate between the White House and the nation’s oldest university.
The Government Services Administration (GSA) plans to send letters to federal agencies asking them to identify Harvard contracts that could be “cancelled or redirected elsewhere,” according to a senior White House official. About 30 contracts worth roughly $100 million are expected to be scrutinized. This follows prior freezes on $2.65 billion in federal grants and an attempt to revoke Harvard’s ability to enroll international students.
Harvard has yet to comment but emphasizes on its website that federal funding supports “cutting-edge medical, scientific, and technological research,” including cancer, heart disease, and infectious diseases. The university warns that without this support, vital research could “come to a halt midstream.”
Review Process and Allegations
The administration will not automatically revoke funding but will review grants to determine their importance. The GSA will advise agencies to “terminate for convenience” any contract deemed to have failed administration standards, with recommendations to reallocate funds accordingly.
A draft letter accuses Harvard of discrimination and antisemitism, citing these as justifications for the funding review.
Students and faculty have strongly criticized the administration’s actions, gathering in protest. Jacob Miller, former head of Harvard Hillel, called the administration’s reasoning “absurd” and an excuse to punish the university.
Impact on Research and Staff
Officials have stated that affiliated hospitals will not be affected, and agencies can petition to retain critical funding.
One affected department is the Sinclair Lab at Harvard Medical School, which studies aging and diseases like Alzheimer’s and cancer. The lab lost a National Institutes of Health grant and career funding for research into age reversal therapies. International researchers, half the lab’s staff, were impacted by the administration’s attempt to block Harvard’s hosting of foreign scholars.
Lab founder David Sinclair highlighted the severe consequences: halted experiments and jeopardized contributions from international researchers, which threaten scientific progress in the US.
This is not the first time the administration has targeted Harvard. In April, the White House threatened the university’s tax-exempt status and froze billions in funding, leading to lawsuits. The attempt to restrict international enrollment also resulted in legal challenges and a court injunction.
Harvard President Alan Garber questioned the rationale, stating that research funding is a government investment in “high-priority work” essential to the nation’s progress.
Adam Nguyen, a Harvard alumnus, emphasized the human cost: graduate students and researchers dependent on these funds risk losing jobs and halting projects immediately.
What The Author Thinks
This aggressive move to cut Harvard’s funding seems less about policy and more about political posturing. Undermining world-class research institutions threatens the very innovation and progress that the US claims to prioritize. Scientific advancement requires stability and support, not the uncertainty created by politically motivated funding battles. It’s essential that funding decisions remain focused on merit and national interest, not political vendettas.
