At Harvard, American and international students vow they won't let Trump divide them
Many of the Harvard students — American and foreign-born alike — said they came to the demonstration on the Cambridge campus because of their shared concern for their school and American democracy.
They wanted continued resistance from their school leadership of President Donald Trump's attempts to influence Harvard's management of its campus.
And regardless of their country of origin, the students said they wanted American citizens to be wary of any erosion of their rights by the federal government.
Leo Gerdén, a Harvard student from Sweden, recognizes the risks international students take by publicly protesting the government.
" I am feeling it every day. Whenever I'm walking on the street, I'm looking behind my shoulder and thinking if that man who looks like a civilian is actually a civilian or if it's a masked ICE agent," he told MassLive.
But as several dozen students gathered Tuesday outside the Harvard Science Center, Gerdén said that fear did not deter his desire to advocate for the future of his school and what he believed in.
'We are fighting the front line battle for American democracy,' he said.
Karl Molden, a 21-year-old Harvard student from Vienna, said he too felt a responsibility to the United States.
'The threat of a dying democracy in the U.S. is very abstract,' Molden said. Not so in much of Europe, where he hails from.
'A lot of Americans are taking elections, freedom of speech, for granted,' Molden said. 'At the verge of [democracy] breaking down, we have to be as honest as possible about that, and as national students, we want to send the word to Americans: watch out.'
The protest played out as the university eyed a summer court date in its new legal fight with the Trump administration to protect billions in federal research funding for the school.
The Trump administration is seeking an overhaul of Harvard's admissions, discipline and management policies, and has placed at least $2.2 billion in multi-year grant funding on the line to compel the school's cooperation.
Administration officials say the reforms are necessary because the university has done too little to protect Jewish students from antisemitism amid a wave of pro-Palestinian protests that began after the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Earlier Tuesday, Harvard released long-awaited reports on antisemitism and anti-Muslim or anti-Arab bias, finding a collection of failures by the school to adequately support students of Jewish, Muslim, Arab or other backgrounds or manage the heightened campus tensions after the attacks.
Harvard President Alan Garber apologized, pledging the school would 'redouble' its efforts to combat hate so that 'mutual respect is the norm,' along with multiple other commitments he laid out in a lengthy letter to the school community.
Federal officials have warned they could take up to $9 billion from Harvard if the school refused the government's demands for reform, which included an end to its diversity, equity and inclusion programs and independent audits of Harvard's student, faculty and staff viewpoint diversity.
A federal judge on Monday scheduled arguments for July 21 over the university's lawsuit against the government, after both sides met in court for the first time in a brief hearing.
Harvard students said they were proud of their school leadership's stance against federal influence. But they also lambasted other moves from the school they saw as capitulating to some of Trump's demands, including the renaming of the school's diversity, equity and inclusion office and the withdrawal of school funding for campus affinity group graduation celebrations.
Tuesday's rally occurred amid weeks of tremendous uncertainty for international students at Harvard and other colleges and universities across the country.
The Trump administration has revoked and then abruptly reinstated the legal status of thousands of international students, placing their ability to study in the United States on ever-shifting ground.
In some circumstances, the administration has taken steps to deport international students who have protested against government policies such as its support for Israel.
Abdullah Shahid Sial, a Harvard student from Pakistan, said he recognized the threat facing international students who protested the government. But he said he felt a responsibility to stand up for what he believed in.
'I don't want to not speak up when times are actually tough,' he said.
In the face of pressure from the federal government, Harvard maintains it has taken meaningful, ongoing steps to combat antisemitic discrimination against Jews on campus, though Garber acknowledged significant work left to do combating hate in his message to the school Tuesday.
Harvard's lawsuit also pushed back on the administration's attempts to exert control over a private university, something Garber has called 'beyond the power of the federal government.'
'No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,' Garber wrote in a letter to the school community on April 14.
Some Jews also fear Trump has politicized the fight against antisemitism.
Jonathan Greenblatt, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, a leading Jewish civil rights group, said that though Harvard has taken steps 'in the right direction' to combat antisemitism, the school has had a 'serious problem of antisemitism' dating back years and needs to do a 'demonstrably better job' combatting anti-Jewish hate.
Read more: Trump's $2.2B funding freeze for Harvard would hit cancer research, battlefield medicine and more
However, the Trump administration's demands of Harvard have gone beyond the ADL's aims for reform, Greenblatt wrote earlier this month.
'The issue of combating antisemitism on campus should be addressed on its own process and merits,' he wrote. 'Other debates on higher education may be important, but they can and should be resolved separate from fighting antisemitism on campus.'
'Campus antisemitism is real. We've seen it. We've felt it,' Maia Hoffenberg, a Jewish Harvard student, told the crowd gathered at Tuesday's rally.
But, she added, 'The Trump administration is trying to use me and trying to use all of Harvard's Jewish students to wage a war against higher education.'
Cornell William Brooks, a Harvard professor and former president of the NAACP, said he felt a responsibility to demonstrate alongside the school's students.
'I have to be at your side when you decided to take on this administration and these constitutionally and morally wrong-headed policies,' he said, urging unity among Harvard's diverse student body.
Caleb Thompson, one of Harvard's co-student body presidents, was among the students urging Harvard to ignore an upcoming deadline from the Trump administration to turn over records on international students.
Shahid Sial, his fellow student body president, also urged Harvard students to remain united.
'When someone attacks a member of our household, we all fight them. We all stand up for them,' he said. 'A divided Harvard is a Harvard that has already lost.'
However, he later added, the response from students to the events of recent weeks gave him hope.
'Harvard is the most united it has ever been,' he said.
Harvard task force reports reveal discrimination, hate on campus, president apologizes
2 Harvard grad students to undergo anger management for assaulting student, DA says
Feds launch racial discrimination investigations targeting Harvard Law Review
Harvard renames its DEI office, conceding on Trump demand
Read the original article on MassLive.
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags

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


New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
Trump, European Union Commission prez give ‘50-50′ chance of striking trade deal after Scotland meeting: ‘Rebalancing'
President Trump and European Union Commission President Ursula von der Leyen both put the odds of reaching a trade deal at 50% ahead of their negotiations Sunday, but remained hopeful an agreement could be finalized. 'I think the President is right, we have a 50 to 50% chance to strike a deal. And indeed it is about rebalancing,' she told reporters in the DJT Ballroom at Trump Turnberry off the west coast of Scotland. Trump has given the EU an Aug. 1 deadline to ink a new trade deal with him or else face 30% tariffs. The EU is a block of 27 trade countries, which, taken together, traded about $1.68 trillion worth of goods with the US last year. Advertisement 3 President Donald Trump meets European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at the Trump Turnberry golf course in Turnberry, Scotland. AP 'This is the biggest deal. People don't realize this is bigger than any other deal,' Trump stressed ahead of his talks with the EU president. The president also noted that while a deal with the EU will address most outstanding trade-related issues, 'pharmaceuticals won't be part of it, because we have to have them made in the United States.' Advertisement Trump teased that he would know after about an hour whether or not a deal with the EU is possible before the Aug. 1 deadline and revealed that there are about 3 to 4 sticking points, but didn't detail specifics of what those issues are. He also aired his general grievances with European trade practices, particularly with automobiles and agriculture, though it wasn't clear if those were among the sticking points. 'We don't sell cars into Europe. We don't sell, essentially, agriculture of any great degree. They want to have their farmers do it, and they want to have their car companies do it,' he said. 'I'm not saying anything that nobody knows. We have a rough situation. If we want to sell cars in Europe, we're not allowed to. And as you know, they sell millions and millions of cars [into the US],' he added. 'What we want to do is make everybody happy.' Advertisement 3 The president also noted that while a deal with the EU will address most outstanding trade-related issues, 'pharmaceuticals won't be part of it, because we have to have them made in the United States.' Davide Bonaldo/SOPA Images/Shutterstock Von der Leyen, who flew to Scotland during Trump's four-day trip to the United Kingdom to meet with the American president, buttered him up 'as a tough negotiator and dealmaker.' 'And fair,' Trump interjected. Trump emphasized during his gaggle with reporters that he has no intention of delaying the Aug. 1 deadline before his customized 'Liberation Day' tariffs take effect. The president previously moved that deadline twice. Advertisement Rumors have swirled that Trump is eyeing a 15% baseline tariff on the EU, which would effectively cut his 'Liberation Day' proposal in half. Many Europeans have hoped he would drop that to the 10% baseline he has imposed on virtually all US imports — which is also the same rate he gave the United Kingdom during the tariff deal announced in May. 3 Trump emphasized during his gaggle with reporters that he has no intention of delaying the Aug. 1 deadline before his customized 'Liberation Day' tariffs take effect. Getty Images 'Better meaning lower?' Trump replied when a reporter asked him if he could do better than 15%. 'No.' So far, Trump has cut tariff deals with the UK, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines. The president teased that his team recently locked down another deal, but didn't specify which country. He also has a variety of tariffs in place now, such as a 25% rate on automobiles, aluminum, and steel, as well as 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico that don't comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. He's also recently mused about jacking up tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Trump has also reached a tariff truce with China and given Beijing an Aug. 12 deadline to cut a broader deal. Earlier this month, he gave Moscow an ultimatum to cut a peace deal with neighboring Ukraine within 50 days or else face 100% secondary tariffs on Russian energy — meaning levies imposed on countries that import from Russia.


NBC News
a minute ago
- NBC News
Trump reaches agreement with E.U. to lower tariffs to 15%
President Donald Trump announced a trade agreement on Sunday with the European Union that would lower tariffs to 15%, ending what had been months of uncertainty surrounding trade with the United States' largest trade partner. The tariff rate is a reduction from the 30% that Trump threatened on July 12 and the 20% he said he would impose on April 2. Announcing the agreement, Trump said the E.U. will not impose a tariff on U.S. imports. He added this agreement was 'satisfactory to both sides.' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Sunday alongside Trump that the pact 'will bring stability. It will bring predictability. That's very important for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.' The agreement appears to closely mirror the trade agreement announced with Japan on Tuesday, under which Japanese imports will face a 15% import duty, which was also lower than Trump earlier threatened. But last year, the average U.S. tariff on imports from the European Union was just 1.2%, according to Capital Economics' chief Europe economist. The European Union has been in active negotiations with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer for weeks and had believed it was extremely close to a deal before Trump suddenly fired off a letter on Truth Social saying he would hike tariffs to 30%. The EU's top trade negotiator made multiple trips across the Atlantic to meet with his U.S. counterparts and was set to speak by phone with Lutnick again Wednesday, according to a spokesperson for the E.U. 'Imposing 30% tariffs on E.U. exports would disrupt essential transatlantic supply chains, to the detriment of businesses, consumers and patients on both sides of the Atlantic,' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said after Trump's July letter. Immediately after the letter, the E.U. said it would continue working towards an agreement of some type by the new deadline of August 1. But the bloc continued to simultaneously prepare an extensive list of U.S. products against which it could apply retaliatory tariffs if an agreement wasn't reached amid fears that Trump could end talks. Some of those products included Boeing aircraft, U.S. vehicles and imports from politically sensitive states such as bourbon from Kentucky and soybeans from Louisiana. At the time of the announcement, the E.U. had about $100 billion worth of retaliatory tariffs ready to deploy. Agricultural and business groups warned that 30% tariffs on the European Union could have dramatically impacted the price and availability of wines, cheeses, pasta and called the levy 'incomprehensible.' Cars and other vehicles produced in the E.U. could still face increased prices. 'The costs for our companies have already reached the billions—and with each passing day, the total continues to grow,' the German auto trade group VDA told NBC News in a statement on July 14. The 27 countries of the European Union are the United States' largest trading partner — its $605 billion worth of imports into the U.S. surpass Mexico, Canada and even China. The most valuable category of imports in 2024 was drugs and pharmaceuticals primarily from Ireland, followed by autos, aircraft and other heavy machinery from nations such as France and Germany. Trump has separately threatened to impose a 200% tariff on any drugs imported into the U.S., though it would not be applied for at least 18 months. It was unclear if the deal with the E.U. would prevent that.


Atlantic
a minute ago
- Atlantic
Zelensky Went Soft on Corruption Because the U.S. Did
Volodymyr Zelensky built a mythic reputation as a lonely bulwark against global tyranny. On Tuesday, the president of Ukraine signed that reputation away, enacting a law that gutted the independence of his country's anti-corruption agencies just as they closed in on his closest political allies, reportedly including one of his longtime business partners and a former deputy prime minister. To justify the decision, he cloaked it in an invented conspiracy, insinuating that Russian moles had implanted themselves in the machinery of justice. This is a scoundrel's playbook. Despite the ongoing war, Ukrainians swamped the streets of Kyiv in protest of their president's betrayal of democracy, forcing Zelensky to introduce new legislation reversing the bill he had just signed into law. It was a concession of error—and possibly an empty gesture, because the new bill is hardly a lock to pass the legislature. That Zelensky brazenly weakened Ukraine's anti-corruption guardrails in the first place shouldn't come as a shock. They were erected only under sustained pressure from the Obama administration as part of an explicit bargain: In exchange for military and financial support, Ukraine would rein in its oligarchs and reform its public institutions. Over time, the country drifted, however unevenly, toward a system that was more transparent, less captive to hidden hands. But in the Trump era, the United States has grown proudly tolerant of global corruption. In fact, it actively encourages its proliferation. Beyond the president's own venal example, this is deliberate policy. Brick by brick, Donald Trump has dismantled the apparatus that his predecessors built to constrain global kleptocracy, and leaders around the world have absorbed the fact that the pressure for open, democratic governance is off. Anne Applebaum: Kleptocracy, Inc. Three weeks into his current term, Trump paused enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act—loudly declaring that the United States wasn't going to police foreign bribery. Weeks later, America skipped a meeting of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's anti-bribery working group for the first time since its founding 30 years ago. As the head of the anti-corruption group Transparency International warned, Trump was sending 'a dangerous signal that bribery is back on the table.' For decades, the more than prosecute bribery cases; it tried to cultivate civil-society organizations that helped emerging democracies combat corruption themselves. But upon returning to the presidency, Trump destroyed USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, and the U.S. Institute of Peace, dismantling the constellation of government agencies that had quietly tutored investigative journalists, trained judges, and funded watchdogs. These groups weren't incidental casualties in DOGE's seemingly scattershot demolition of the American state. Trump long loathed the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which he described as a 'horrible law,' an animus stoked by the fact that some of his closest associates have been accused of murky dealings abroad. Crushing programs and organizations that fight kleptocracy meshed with the 'America First' instincts of his base; the likes of Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon abhor the export of liberal values to the world. From the wreckage of these institutions, a Trump Doctrine has taken shape, one that uses American economic and political power to shield corrupt autocrats from accountability. Benjamin Netanyahu, on trial for bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, has been a prime beneficiary. Just as he was preparing to testify under oath, Trump denounced the prosecution as a 'political witch hunt' and threatened to withhold U.S. aid if the trial moved forward. Given Israel's reliance on American support, the threat had bite. Not long after Trump's outburst, the court postponed Netanyahu's testimony, citing national-security concerns. Trump acts as if justice for strongmen is a moral imperative. No retaliatory measure is apparently off limits. To defend his populist ally in Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, who faces charges related to an attempted coup, Trump revoked the visa of Alexandre de Moraes, the Supreme Court justice overseeing the case. Last month, Trump threatened to impose 50 percent tariffs on Brazilian steel, aluminum, and agricultural exports to punish the country for Bolsonaro's prosecution. This is hard-nosed realism, not just ideological kinship. To protect himself, Trump must defend the rights of populist kleptocrats everywhere. He must discredit the sort of prosecution that he might someday face. That requires recasting malfeasance as perfectly acceptable statesmanship. Listen: The kleptocracy club By stripping anti-corruption from the moral vocabulary of American foreign policy, Trump is reengineering the global order. He's laying the foundation for a new world in which kleptocracy flourishes unfettered, because there's no longer a superpower that, even rhetorically, aspires to purge the world of corruption. Of course, the United States has never pushed as hard as it could, and ill-gotten gains have been smuggled into its bank accounts, cloaked in shell companies. Still, oligarchs were forced to disguise their thievery, because there was at least the threat of legal consequence. In the world that Trump is building, there's no need for disguise—corruption is a credential, not a liability. Zelensky is evidence of the new paradigm. Although his initial campaign for president in 2019 was backed by an oligarch, he could never be confused for Bolsonaro or Netanyahu. He didn't enrich himself by plundering the state. But now that Trump has given the world permission to turn away from the ideals of good governance, even the sainted Zelensky has seized the opportunity to protect the illicit profiteering of his friends and allies. Yet there's a legacy of the old system that Trump hasn't wholly eliminated: the institutions and civil societies that the United States spent a generation helping build. In Ukraine, those organizations and activists have refused to accept a retreat into oligarchy, and they might still preserve their governmental guardians against corruption. For now, they are all that remain between the world and a new golden age of impunity.