The legal fight over whether the government can cut funding to Harvard University just got more heated.
Donald Trump didn’t hold back, firing off a sharp attack on the judge overseeing the case — Judge Allison Burroughs — who happens to be an Obama appointee.
The dispute centers on whether the Trump administration had the legal right to defund Harvard over accusations the university hasn’t done enough to fight antisemitism on campus.
Judge Burroughs Questions Government’s Case
During a tense hearing on Monday, Judge Burroughs grilled the government’s lawyer with pointed questions that made it clear she’s skeptical of the administration’s argument.
While she didn’t make a decision at the hearing, her tough stance was enough for Trump to call her a “total disaster” on social media, claiming the judge is biased against him and is an “automatic loss” for his side.
Trump Accuses Harvard of Hypocrisy
Trump’s criticism wasn’t limited to the judge.
He slammed Harvard for having a massive $52 billion in assets while, in his view, being “anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-America.”
He insisted that much of Harvard’s funding comes from the U.S. government and that it’s unfair to allow the university to keep money when it supposedly isn’t tackling antisemitism properly.
Harvard Fights to Restore Its Funding
On the other side, Harvard’s legal team argues that this lawsuit is really about the government overstepping its bounds and trying to control what happens inside a private university.
At Monday’s hearing, Harvard requested that the court reverse the freeze on federal funding so it can resume its wide-ranging scientific and medical research projects, many of which have suffered due to the withheld grants.
Government Defends Its Authority to Cut Funds
Government attorney Michael Velchik, a Harvard alumnus himself, defended the administration’s move, saying it has the authority to cancel grants that don’t align with its priorities.
Velchik pointed to the aftermath of the October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel, highlighting incidents on campus where protesters chanted antisemitic slogans and Jewish students were targeted.
He stressed that the government isn’t “anti-Harvard” but is standing up for Jewish students and faculty on campus.
Judge Challenges the Government’s Position
Judge Burroughs didn’t hold back in pushing back on the government’s claims.
She called some of the government’s arguments “mind-boggling” and questioned the idea that the executive branch could decide what counts as discriminatory or racist.
She also asked how cutting funding to cancer research labs connected to alleged antisemitism on campus, noting that grants weren’t being taken from labs found to have antisemitic behavior.
Though the judge strongly questioned the government’s position, she did not issue a ruling during the hearing and said she will provide a written decision later.
Harvard Claims Retaliation and Pushes Back on Government Demands
Harvard’s lawsuit claims that the Trump administration launched this defunding effort as retaliation after the university refused to meet several demands from a federal antisemitism task force earlier this year.
These demands included major changes to campus protests, academics, admissions policies, and even audits of student and faculty viewpoints.
The task force suggested Harvard should admit more students or hire professors if it was found to lack diversity of opinion.
Harvard President Alan Garber responded by saying the university has taken steps to fight antisemitism but insisted that no government should dictate what private universities can teach or whom they can admit or hire.