Trump admin. accuses Harvard of 'violent violation' of civil rights law: A timeline of the president's war with the university
The move marked the latest escalation in the ongoing back-and-forth between the president and Harvard, which has come under a barrage of attacks in the months since President Trump returned to office. The administration has already taken away billions of dollars in federal research grants, attempted to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status and tried to block the school from hosting international students.
Since returning to office, Trump has mounted a sweeping campaign to impose his ideological worldview on some of the country's most prominent universities, revoking hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding from schools like Columbia, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania. But no college has faced the kinds of attacks that Harvard has.
Harvard has not responded publicly to Monday's letter, but its president, Alan M. Garber, has previously condemned the administration's 'unlawful and unwarranted' actions. The university has reportedly been negotiating a possible settlement with the administration that would potentially offer the school some relief in exchange for accepting some of the administration's terms for how it should reshape its internal policies.
Trump expressed confidence that the two sides could strike a deal in a post on Truth Social earlier this month, writing that Harvard had acted 'extremely appropriately' during their discussions and that the terms of the agreement would be ''mindbogglingly' HISTORIC' if it is finalized. It's unclear how Monday's action by the administration might affect those ongoing negotiations.
Here's a timeline of the most aggressive actions the Trump administration has taken against Harvard and how the school has responded.
March 31: The administration's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism announces it will conduct a 'comprehensive review' of nearly $9 billion in contracts and grants that Harvard is slated to receive from the federal government over the school's alleged 'failure to protect students on campus from anti-Semitic discrimination.'
April 11: The administration sends Harvard a letter containing a wide-ranging slate of demands, including calling for the school to reform its admissions and hiring policies, end its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices, and grant the government extensive new authority over university operations and education.
April 14: Harvard announces that it is refusing to comply with those demands, insisting that it would not 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' The administration responds by revoking $2.2 billion in federal research grants.
April 16: DHS launches an investigation into Harvard's international student enrollment, threatens to revoke its ability to host them and demands that the university share comprehensive internal information about each foreign student with the administration.
April 17: The Department of Education announces an investigation into donations Harvard has received from foreign sources, accusing the university of failing to accurately disclose the money it gets from overseas.
April 19: The Department of Health and Human Services announces a comprehensive civil rights investigation into all activities on Harvard's campus since the Hamas attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in order to determine whether the school is violating federal antidiscrimination laws.
April 20: The administration reportedly moves to revoke an additional $1 billion in health research funding for Harvard and its research partners.
April 21: Harvard sues to block the funding freeze. The lawsuit condemns the 'broad attack' on the university and argues that the administration broke the law by violating the school's 'academic independence.'
April 25: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announces an investigation into Harvard's hiring practices, accusing the school of discriminating against 'white, Asian, male, or straight employees, applicants, and training program participants.'
April 28: The Education Department and HHS announce a joint investigation into allegations of 'race-based discrimination' in the operations of the Harvard Law Review.
May 2: Trump says that he is revoking Harvard's tax-exempt status. It's unclear whether this will actually happen, however, because federal law explicitly bars presidents from directing the Internal Revenue Service to review or change any taxpayer's or institution's tax status.
May 5: The Education Department declares that Harvard is disqualified from receiving any federal grant funding in the future.
May 12: Harvard releases a letter in which it acknowledges 'common ground' it shares with the administration and expresses hope that its 'partnership' with the government can be restored. That same day, the Justice Department launches an investigation into whether Harvard's admissions practices violate antidiscrimination laws.
May 13: The administration's joint task force revokes an additional $450 million in grant funding over claims that Harvard has 'repeatedly failed to confront the pervasive race discrimination and anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus.'
May 19: Another $60 million in medical research grant funding is canceled by HHS.
May 22: DHS announces that Harvard can no longer host international students.
May 23: Harvard sues to block the order. A federal judge temporarily rules in Harvard's favor, preventing the order from going into effect for at least two weeks to allow a more thorough legal challenge to get underway.
May 27: The Trump administration orders all federal agencies to end any remaining contracts — totaling an estimated $100 million — they have with Harvard.
May 29: The Trump administration issues a letter pausing its revocation of Harvard's ability to host international students for 30 days. A federal judge extends the deadline on the previous order that temporarily blocks the policy from going into effect.
June 23: A federal judge issues an order indefinitely blocking the administration from revoking Harvard's right to host international students.
June 26: Harvard reaches an agreement with the University of Toronto that will allow certain Harvard graduate students to attend the Canadian university if the administration succeeds in preventing them from attending college in the United States.
June 30: The administration's antisemitism task force formally accuses Harvard of violating civil rights law and threatens to revoke all federal funding over the school's purported failure to protect Jewish students on campus. A letter from the task force accuses the university of being 'deliberately indifferent' to antisemitism in some cases and a 'willful participant' in attacks on Jewish people.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
8 minutes ago
- Newsweek
US Immigration Budget Now Bigger Than Israel's Military Spending
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Senate has passed a bill making Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) the U.S.'s largest interior law enforcement agency with funding for Donald Trump's immigration enforcement agenda higher than most of the world's militaries, including Israel's. Pending its passage in the House of Representatives, Trump's bill could mean a massive increase in ICE funding as part of an immigration enforcement agenda worth $150 billion over four years. This image from June 12, 2025 shows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at Delaney Hall, a migrant detention facility, in Newark, New Jersey. This image from June 12, 2025 shows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at Delaney Hall, a migrant detention facility, in Newark, New It Matters If passed by Congress, Trump's 1000-page bill could reshape the U.S. immigration system with a significant increase in funding for expanding law enforcement and detention network while increasing costs to legally immigrate to the U.S. What To Know A revised version of Trump's bill was narrowly voted through the Senate on Tuesday. The estimated price tag of the legislation is around $150 billion between now and 2029—an annual average of $37.5 billion, which is higher than the military expenditure of all but 15 countries. This figure is more than the annual military budget of Italy, which at $30.8 billion, is the world's 16th highest defense spender for this year according to tracker Global Fire Power. It is also higher than military spending for Israel, ($30 billion), the Netherlands ($27 billion) and Brazil ($26.1 billion). Different news outlets have broken down in different ways. The National Immigration Law Center said that ICE's detention budget would increase to $45 billion to build immigration jails for single adults and families, a price tag 13 times more than ICE's 2024 detention budget. The bill also allocates $29.9 billion in additional funding for ICE activities, including hiring new agents and securing transportation contracts to move migrants between detention centers and facilitate deportations, according to Migrant Insider. Meanwhile an assessment by Detention Watch Network said the bill set aside $59 billion to militarize the border which included wall construction, CBP agents and vehicles, and border surveillance technology. It also said that there was $10 billion for grants to reimburse states who enact anti-immigrant policies and another $1 billion to the Department of Defense to deploy military personnel to the border and to detain migrants. What People Are Saying House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote on X that the bill "provides the ESSENTIAL funding needed to secure our nation's borders." Silky Shah, Executive Director of Detention Watch Network said in a statement: "This bill skyrockets ICE's budget to never before seen funding levels and will make it the largest law enforcement agency in the country." "ICE will now have 13 times its current fiscal budget for detention, which is already operating at a historic high, on top of the funding in ICE's annual budget that Congress sets each year." Adam Isacson, a researcher with human rights advocacy organization WOLA per the AP, "One thing about this bill, these sections are super no real specificity in the bill about how it's going to be spent." What Happens Next Trump's bill returns to the House of Representatives on Wednesday after a revised version was narrowly voted through the Senate on Tuesday. The president has set Congress a loose deadline of July 4 but further opposition is expected.


Newsweek
9 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Republicans Overperform in Major California Election
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Republicans scored an unexpectedly strong showing in a closely watched special election in California. Early returns in Tuesday's high-stakes runoff for the San Diego County Board of Supervisors show Republican candidate John McCann running significantly closer than many expected in a Democratic-leaning district that former Vice President Kamala Harris won by 20 points. Newsweek reached out to McCann via email for comment. Why It Matters The special election comes after widespread protests and unrest in nearby Los Angeles over Trump's immigration policies, which have seen Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out deportation raids in the city. But despite intense anti-ICE protests in California, that wave of activism does not appear to be translating into stronger support for Democrats. Chula Vista Mayor John McCann and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, who are running in a special election to fill the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.. Chula Vista Mayor John McCann and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, who are running in a special election to fill the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.. City of Imperial Beach and Mayor McCann via Facebook What To Know As of late Tuesday night, Paloma Aguirre, the Democratic mayor of Imperial Beach, held a narrow 6-point lead over McCann, the Republican mayor of Chula Vista, with 53 percent to 47 percent in the race for the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. Newsweek reached out to Aguirre via email for comment. So far, the ballots counted represent about 19 percent of the more than 370,000 registered voters in the district, according to the Registrar of Voters. District 1 includes much of the South Bay and parts of the city of San Diego, and is widely regarded as a pivotal swing seat on the influential five-member Board. Since the sudden resignation of Supervisor Nora Vargas last December, who stepped down citing "personal safety and security reasons," the Board has been split 2–2 between Democrats and Republicans. If Aguirre's early lead holds, she will become the next District 1 supervisor, tipping the balance of power back in favor of Democrats. The last time Republicans dominated the Board was before 2020, when Democrats secured a majority for the first time in a generation. San Diego County supervisors oversee an $8.5 billion budget and play a major role in administering state and federal programs, such as CalFresh and Medi-Cal, while also governing unincorporated communities throughout the region. Aguirre says she is running to "bring change to county government" and to fight for working people by tackling local crises head-on. Aguirre has focused much of her campaign on addressing the issue of sewage pollution at the United States–Mexico border, which has plagued South Bay beaches for years. She has pledged to push for new infrastructure funding, a Superfund designation from the EPA, and to treat the issue as a public health emergency. She's also promised to prioritize an audit of homelessness spending, expand treatment and shelter options, and address crime and high energy costs for residents. McCann, a U.S. Navy veteran, has emphasized his record on emergency response and public safety. His campaign focuses on increasing law enforcement funding, reducing government waste, and opposing new taxes, including the proposed mileage tax. McCann says he'll work to expand health care, job training, and other essential services for veterans, while also helping to secure funding to fix the border sewage crisis and hold responsible parties accountable. What People Are Saying Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, in a Tuesday statement to KPBS: "Today belongs to the working-class people of District 1, a nuestra gente trabajadora, who now have a fighter at the county Board of Supervisors who will hold the line against the Trump administration." Chula Vista Mayor John McCann told ABC 10 San Diego: "Paloma and I actually went back to Washington, D.C., to help raise money at the White House and Congress together. I'm willing to work with anybody as long as we want to focus on results and having solutions." What Happens Next County officials expect to continue counting ballots throughout the week, with an official update on results scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday. The Registrar of Voters' Office has until July 31 to certify the election. The winner will fill the vacant seat for the remainder of the current term that ends in January 2029.


Chicago Tribune
9 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Paramount to pay $16 million in settlement with President Donald Trump over '60 Minutes' interview
In a case seen as a challenge to free speech, Paramount has agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump over the editing of CBS' ' 60 Minutes' interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris in October. Paramount told media outlets the money will go to Trump's future presidential library, not to the president himself. It said the settlement did not involve an apology. Trump's lawyer said the president had suffered 'mental anguish' over the editing of the interview by CBS News, while Paramount and CBS rejected his contention that it was edited to enhance how Harris sounded. They had sought to get Trump's lawsuit dismissed. There was no immediate word from the White House about the settlement of the case, which Trump filed in Amarillo, Texas. The case has been closely watched by advocates for press freedom and by journalists within CBS, whose lawyers called Trump's lawsuit 'completely without merit' and promised to vigorously fight it after it was filed. In early February, '60 Minutes' released a full, unedited transcript of the interview. Under the settlement reached with help of a mediator, Paramount agreed that '60 Minutes' will release transcripts of future interviews of presidential candidates, 'subject to redactions as required for legal and national security concerns,' CBS News cited the statement as saying. Trump, who did not agree to be interviewed by '60 Minutes' during the campaign, protested editing where Harris is seen giving two different answers to a question by the show's Bill Whitaker in separate clips aired on '60 Minutes' and 'Face the Nation' earlier in the day. CBS said each reply came within Harris' long-winded answer to Whitaker, but was edited to be more succinct. The president's lawyer, Edward Andrew Paltzik, said that caused confusion and 'mental anguish,' misleading voters and causing them to pay less attention to Trump and his Truth Social platform. Paramount and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone were seeking the settlement with Trump, whose administration must approve the company's proposed merger with Skydance Media. CBS News President and CEO Wendy McMahon and '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, who both opposed a settlement, have resigned in recent weeks. The Freedom of the Press Foundation, a media advocacy group that says it is a Paramount shareholder, has said that it would file a lawsuit in protest if a settlement was reached. In December, ABC News settled a defamation lawsuit by Trump over statements made by anchor George Stephanopoulos, agreeing to pay $15 million toward Trump's presidential library rather than engage in a public fight. Meta reportedly paid $25 million to settle Trump's lawsuit against the company over its decision to suspend his social media accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.