
Ivy League universities paid hundreds of millions to settle with Trump. Is UCLA next?
Do they agree to a costly settlement, potentially incurring the anger of taxpayers, politicians and campus communities in a deep-blue state that's largely opposed to President Trump and his battle to remake higher education?
Or do they go to court, entering a protracted legal fight and possibly inviting further debilitating federal actions against the nation's premier public university system, which has until now carefully avoided head-on conflicts with the White House?
Leaders of the University of California, including its systemwide president, James B. Milliken; UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk and UC's 24-member Board of Regents — California Gov. Gavin Newsom is an ex-officio member — have just days to decide.
In findings issued Tuesday, U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and the Justice Department said UCLA would pay a 'heavy price' for acting with 'deliberate indifference' to the civil rights of Jewish and Israeli students who complained of antisemitic incidents since Oct. 7, 2023. That's when Hamas attacked Israel, which led to Israel's war in Gaza and the pro-Palestinian student encampment on Royce Quad.
The Justice Department gave UC — which oversees federal legal matters for UCLA and nine other campuses — a week to respond to the allegations of antisemitism. It wrote that 'unless there is reasonable certainty that we can reach an agreement' to 'ensure that the hostile environment is eliminated and reasonable steps are taken to prevent its recurrence,' the department would sue by Sept. 2.
A day after the Justice Department disclosed its findings, the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department of Energy and other federal agencies said they were suspending hundreds of grants to UCLA researchers. A letter from the NSF cited the university's alleged 'discrimination' in admissions and failure to 'promote a research environment free of antisemitism.' A Department of Energy letter cutting off grants on clean energy and nuclear power plants made similar accusations, adding that 'UCLA discriminates against and endangers women by allowing men in women's sports and private women-only spaces.'
Initial data shared with The Times on Thursday night showed the cuts to be at least $200 million. On Friday, additional information shared by UC and federal officials pointed to the number being greater than $300 million — more than a quarter of UCLA's $1.1 billion in annual federal funding and contracts. UCLA has not released a total number.
In a campuswide message Thursday, Frenk, the UCLA chancellor, called the government's moves 'deeply disappointing.'
'This far-reaching penalty of defunding life-saving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination,' Frenk said.
In a statement to The Times Friday, an official from the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the NIH, said it would 'not fund institutions that promote antisemitism. We will use every tool we have to ensure institutions follow the law.'
An NSF spokesperson also confirmed the UCLA cuts, saying Friday that the university is no longer in 'alignment with current NSF priorities.' A Department of Energy spokesperson also verified the cuts but did not elaborate outside of pointing to the department's letter to UCLA.
The Times spoke to more than a dozen current and former senior UC leaders in addition to higher education experts about the rapid deliberations taking place this week, which for the first time have drawn a major public university system into the orbit of a White House that has largely focused its ire on Ivy League schools.
Trump has accused universities of being too liberal, illegally recruiting for diversity in ways that hurt white and Asian American students and faculty, and being overly tolerant of pro-Palestinian students who he labels as antisemites aligned with Hamas.
Universities, including UCLA, have largely denied the accusations, although school officials have admitted that they under-delivered in responding to Jewish student concerns. In the last two years, encampments took over small portions of campuses, and, as a result, were blamed for denying campus access to pro-Israel Jews.
In a major payout announced Tuesday — before the Justice Department's findings — UCLA said it would dole out $6.45 million to settle a federal lawsuit brought by three Jewish students and a medical school professor who alleged the university violated their civil rights and enabled antisemitism during the pro-Palestinian encampment in 2024. About $2.3 million will be donated to eight groups that work with Jewish communities, including the Anti-Defamation League, Chabad and Hillel. Another $320,000 will be directed to a UCLA initiative to combat antisemitism, and the rest of the funds will go toward legal fees.
Through spokespersons, Frenk and Milliken declined interviews on what next steps UCLA might take. Friday was Milliken's first day on the job after the long-planned departure of former UC President Michael V. Drake, who will return to teaching and research.
But in public remarks this week, Newsom said he was 'reviewing' the Justice Department's findings and that UC would be 'responsive.'
The governor, who spoke during an event at the former McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento County on Thursday, said he had a meeting with Drake scheduled that day to discuss the Trump administration's charges.
Newsom did not respond specifically to a question from The Times about whether UC would settle with Trump.
'We're reviewing the details of the DOJ's latest and then that deadline on Tuesday,' the governor said. 'So we'll be responsive.'
In a statement Friday, Newsom said, 'Freezing critical research funding for UCLA — dollars that were going to study invasive diseases, cure cancer, and build new defense technologies — makes our country less safe. It is a cruel manipulation to use Jewish students' real concerns about antisemitism on campus as an excuse to cut millions of dollars in grants that were being used to make all Americans safer and healthier.'
Senior UCLA and UC leaders, who spoke on background because they were not authorized to discuss legal decisions, said the university has been bracing for this moment for months. The university and individual campuses are under multiple federal investigations into alleged use of race in admissions, employment discrimination against Jews, and civil rights complaints from Jewish students. At the same time, leaders said, they were hoping the multimillion-dollar settlement with Jewish students would buy them time.
'It backfired,' said one senior administrator at UCLA, reflecting the sense of whiplash felt among many who were interviewed. 'Within hours of announcing our settlement, the DOJ was on our back.'
Other senior UC officials said the system was considering suing Trump. It has already sued various federal agencies or filed briefs in support of lawsuits over widespread grant cuts affecting all major U.S. universities. UC itself, however, has not directly challenged the president's platform of aggressively punishing elite schools for alleged discrimination.
It's unclear if a suit or settlement could wipe out all remaining investigations.
Mark Yudof, a former UC president who led the system from 2008 to 2013, said he felt the Trump administration was targeting a public university as a way to 'make a statement' about the president's higher education aims going beyond Ivy League institutions.
'But this is not Columbia,' Yudof said, referring to the $221-million settlement the New York campus recently reached with the White House to resolve investigations over alleged antisemitism amid its response to pro-Palestinian protests.
On Wednesday, Brown University also came to a $50-million agreement with the White House. The Brown payment will go toward Rhode Island workforce development programs. Harvard is also negotiating a deal with the government over similar accusations regarding antisemitism.
'The University of California is much more complex,' said Yudof, who lives in Florida and also led the University of Texas and University of Minnesota. 'For one, an issue that may affect UCLA is not going to affect UC Merced or UC Riverside. But do you come to an agreement on all campuses? If there is a settlement payment, does it affect all campuses, depending on the cost?'
George Blumenthal, a former chancellor of UC Santa Cruz, said he 'just can't see UC making the kind of deal that Columbia did or that Harvard contemplates. Committing public funds to Washington to the tune of tens or hundreds of million dollars strikes me as politically untenable in California.'
Pro-Palestinian UCLA groups said they don't agree with the premise of negotiations. They point out that many protesters in last year's encampment were Jewish and argue that the protest — the focus of federal complaints — was not antisemitic.
'We reject this cynical weaponization of antisemitism, and the misinformation campaign spinning calls for Palestinian freedom as antisemitic. We must name this for what it is: a thinly-veiled attempt to punish supporters of Palestinian freedom, and to advance the long-standing conservative goal of dismantling higher education,' said a statement from Graeme Blair, a UCLA associate professor of political science, on behalf of UCLA Faculty for Justice in Palestine.
Higher education experts say UC's decision would set a national precedent. The university's finances include more than $50 billion in operating revenues, $180 billion in investments — including endowment, retirement, and working capital portfolios — and smaller campus-level endowments. The funds support facilities across the state, including multiple academic health centers, investment properties and campuses, as well as tens of thousands of former employees enrolled in retirement plans.
Dozens of public campuses across the U.S. are under investigation or pressure from the White House to atone for alleged wrongdoing to Jewish students or to change admissions, scholarship programs and protest rules and more. But UC has long been a standard-bearer, including in academic and protest freedoms.
'If you are Trump, your target of Harvard or Brown is much easier — a snooty elite — than a public, even a UCLA or Berkeley,' said Rick Hess, an education expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Kenneth Marcus, who served as assistant secretary for civil rights in the Education Department during Trump's first term, said there would be benefits for UCLA and the UC system to enter into a 'systemwide agreement that would enable everybody to put this behind themselves.'
The Justice Department's Tuesday letter said it was investigating all campuses but only issuing findings of violations so far at UCLA.
Marcus, chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, said a systemwide agreement would 'provide the federal government with assurances that the regents are making changes across the board.'
Staff writer Taryn Luna in Sacramento contributed to this report.

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


San Francisco Chronicle
a minute ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump attacks Charlamagne Tha God after radio host criticizes his presidency
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Sunday lashed out at radio host Charlamagne Tha God, saying in a social media post that the popular broadcaster "knows nothing about me or what I have done.' Trump's comments came a day after Charlamagne, whose real name is Lenard McKelvey, criticized Trump on a Fox News show hosted by Lara Trump, the president's daughter-in-law and former co-chair of the Republican National Committee. Asked how he would rate Trump's presidency, the radio host said, 'I wouldn't give it a good rating simply because the least of us are still being impacted the worst.' Trump said on Truth Social that Charlamagne was a 'dope' who voted for Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris. Charlamagne said he personally will benefit from tax breaks approved in Trump's tax-and spending law, but said, 'There's going to be so many people that's hurt by that bill.'' 'Anything that takes away Medicaid from people and will put people in a worse financial situation than they were previously in, I'm not for," he added. Charlamagne also predicted that 'traditional conservatives" are going to take back the Republican Party from Trump's Make America Great Again movement, citing controversy over Trump's refusal to release files related to disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 'I think there's a political coup going on right now in the Republican Party that people aren't paying attention to,' Charlamagne said. 'I think this Epstein thing is going to be a way for traditional conservatives to take their party back. I really do. I think that they know this is the issue that has gotten the base riled up, the MAGA base isn't letting this issue go and for the first time they can probably take their party back and not piss off the MAGA base. I think they're going to do that.' The Epstein case has dominated news coverage in recent weeks after the Justice Department said it will not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision has infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. Officials have said Epstein killed himself in his New York jail cell while awaiting trial in 2019, but his case has generated endless attention and conspiracy theories because of his links to famous people, including Trump and other billionaires. 'Can anyone imagine the uproar there would be if I used that nickname?' Trump asked. Charlamagne told Lara Trump that his criticism of the Republican president was not new, adding that he 'gave President Biden the same hell' when he didn't think the Democrat was doing a good job.


The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Trump fires back at ‘sleazebag' Charlamagne tha God after Epstein comments
President Trump railed against Charlamagne tha God on Sunday after the radio host predicted the Jeffrey Epstein saga would pave the way for traditional Republicans to take back the GOP from the MAGA base. Charlamagne made the remarks in an interview on Fox News's 'My View with Lara Trump,' which is hosted by the president's daughter-in-law. 'The very wonderful and talented Lara Trump, whose show is a big ratings success, put racist sleazebag Charlamagne 'The God'' on her show, the president wrote on Truth Social early Sunday. '(Why is he allowed to use the word 'GOD' when describing himself? Can anyone imagine the uproar there would be if I used that nickname?)' 'He's a Low IQ individual, has no idea what words are coming out of his mouth, and knows nothing about me or what I have done,' Trump continued, before touting several accomplishments of his term. In the Fox News interview on Saturday afternoon, Charlamagne said he thinks 'traditional conservatives are going to take the Republican Party back' following the intense backlash from many of Trump's supporters to the way he has handled calls for transparency around the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. 'I think there's a political coup going on right now in the Republican Party that people aren't paying attention to. I think that this Epstein thing is going to be a way for traditional conservatives to take their party back. I really do. I think that they know this is the issue that has gotten the base riled up. The base, the MAGA base, isn't letting this issue go,' Charlamagne said. 'And for the first time they know they can, you know, probably take their party back and not piss off the MAGA base. I think they're going to do that,' he added. Lara Trump pushed back, saying she doesn't think 'we'll ever see another typical, kind of, traditional election with traditional Republicans,' adding, 'I feel like things have changed.' But Charlamagne said he thinks that line of thinking will be a trap for Republicans, who don't recognize that Trump is a 'once-in-a-lifetime… political juggernaut' who can't be replicated. 'You're not going to be Donald Trump. So if you think you're going to be able to do what Donald Trump has done, talk the way Donald Trump has talked, get away with what Donald Trump has gotten away with, it's not going to happen,' Charlamagne said.


Newsweek
2 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump 'In Denial' About Job Figures, Economy—Nate Silver
Based on factual reporting, incorporates the expertise of the journalist and may offer interpretations and conclusions. Pollster Nate Silver on Sunday called out President Donald Trump's reaction to the latest data about jobs, accusing him of "denialism" and warning that it won't help him fix the nation's slowing economy. "Firing the BLS commissioner won't prevent the effects of tariffs. But it will reduce American economic leadership and increase uncertainty for businesses, workers and investors," Silver wrote in his newsletter, referring to Trump's decision to fire Erika McEntarfer, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), after the agency published a weaker-than-expected jobs report for July. Silver stressed that U.S. economic data remains reliable, as it is meticulously documented and regularly revised "because measuring something as complex as the modern American economy is an incredibly challenging task." "I'm not sure exactly where firing the BLS commissioner ranks on the list of Trump-related outrages," Silver wrote. "Even if Congress does its job and McEntarfer replaced with another competent successor, this could have a chilling effect on BLS and other government agencies to operate independently." Newsweek has reached out to the White House by email on Sunday outside of normal business hours for comment. Why It Matters Trump's decision to fire McEntarfer has sent shockwaves throughout the country, with economists and Democratic lawmakers criticizing the move. Some have accused Trump of trying to "kill the messenger" over heavy revisions to May and June's job numbers, which removed 258,000 jobs previously announced in those months. This followed the July jobs report, which reported 73,000 jobs added, which is well short of the projected 100,000 jobs. The unemployment rate also rose to 4.2 percent. The firing of a high-level labor statistician after the release of adverse economic data raised alarms about the politicization of nonpartisan agencies and reliability of official U.S. economic statistics. Experts and lawmakers stressed that the integrity of the BLS is central to public trust and informed economic decision-making. What To Know Silver, the founder of 538 and one of the most prominent polling experts in last year's presidential election, wrote in his newsletter that July's jobs report has suggested a slowing economy and "Trump is in denial about it." "Each monthly payrolls figure is actually revised three times: once in each of the first two months after initial publication (so July's 73,000 figure will be re-reported in August and then again in September) and then again each January as part of the BLS's annual benchmark revisions," Silver wrote. He argued that the jobs report often only receives attention at the initial announcement, with politicians and news media treating the figure as a simple "beat" or "bust" factor relative to the initial estimate, and that not enough attention is given to the regular cycle of "large revisions and the difficulties in estimation." "All of this feels a little too familiar: it's the same thing that happens when news organizations breathlessly report polling data without considering the margin of error and other challenges for surveys," Silver wrote. He noted that revisions during every month of Trumps' second administration have seen negative revisions, which he wrote is "actually common enough" and that it's more important to look at the trend of revision from month-to-month. Those trends help experts and analysts understand if they're seeing sampling errors or statistical biases in the numbers, which can occur also in the event of an economy facing "some sort of trauma or disruption." Silver also wrote that any attempt to undermine Trump would be better executed by reporting the lower estimates instead of revising them down later, since "revisions don't usually get as much media attention as the headline figures," and that "the May and June revisions are relatively pedestrian." "The largest change ever to an initial jobs figure ever after two months came in March 2020 as the pandemic hit American shores; initially reported as a job loss of 700,000, it was later revised to nearly 1.4 million instead," he wrote. President Donald Trump departs the White House en route to Bedminster, New Jersey, on August 1 in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump departs the White House en route to Bedminster, New Jersey, on August 1 in Washington, D.C. Andrew Thomas/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images What People Are Saying President Donald Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday: "Head of the Bureau of of Labor Statistics did the same thing just before the Presidential Election, when she lifted the numbers for jobs to an all time high. I then won the Election, anyway, and she readjusted the numbers downward, calling it a mistake, of almost one million jobs. A SCAM! She did it again, with another massive 'correction,' and got FIRED! She had the biggest miscalculations in over 50 years." Trump also wrote on Truth Social on Friday: "McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months. Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative. The Economy is BOOMING under 'TRUMP' despite a Fed that also plays games, this time with Interest Rates, where they lowered them twice, and substantially, just before the Presidential Election, I assume in the hopes of getting 'Kamala' elected – How did that work out? Jerome 'Too Late' Powell should also be put "out to pasture." Thank you for your attention to this matter!" Ernie Tedeschi, the former head of Yale University's Budget Lab, wrote on X on Friday about McEntarfer's firing: "I've worked closely with Erika. I know of no economist who is more data-focused & devoted to truth in statistics. She never shied from speaking truth to power when the data were disappointing. Nothing would be worse for US credibility than political meddling in our economic data."