logo
This is getting out of hand

This is getting out of hand

Boston Globe30-05-2025
So while some President Trump-supported reforms, and humility, at the nation's oldest, wealthiest, and most prestigious university might be warranted, the question of 'at what cost' should also be front and center, for conservatives as well as liberals.
Advertisement
We're not talking here simply about some of the more limited demands from the Trump administration, such as ending diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, hiring additional conservative faculty, or instituting policies to better police antisemitism.
Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
We're talking about drastic threats to cut off
We've reached a point, that is, where the Trump administration's pressure tactics are on the verge of causing long-standing damage to a great American institution, one that produces world-changing science, medicine, and literature, as well as business and political leaders — including conservatives.
Advertisement
One would hope, then, that some of those Harvard-trained conservatives have begun asking themselves whether all of this has gone too far. And if they are asking themselves that question, is it not time to start conveying their concerns to the White House?
None of this would require public admissions of regret or performative social media posts. Indeed, such public actions could provoke a doubling-down from our stubborn president. But there is a MAGA political infrastructure, and it seems as pliable to private lobbying as any White House of the past, and perhaps more so.
Maybe this is a step too far for some members of Trump's inner circle, including Steve Bannon (
But what about Ken Griffin, a conservative hedge fund billionaire who has been a sharp critic of Harvard's leftward tilt — but has also given the university
Might they play a role in calling a truce to this massively counterproductive war?
Advertisement
Harvard clearly has a role to play in this. Recent reporting suggests that while the university was making quiet attempts earlier this year to negotiate, those
Like any great power conflict, peace talks usually start with secret overtures through intermediaries. If Harvard hasn't reached out to those intermediaries, we hope it does, and soon.
To resolve this battle with the least damage to the country, to a higher education system that is the envy of the world, and to Harvard itself, the university will clearly have to make some concessions.
That should not be impossible, because not everything Trump is demanding is unreasonable: reining in at least some DEI programs; implementing stronger protections for Jewish students; bringing greater ideological diversity into its faculty. It also seems entirely possible that the university would benefit from weaning itself from some federal dollars.
Harvard's only red lines should be its academic freedom and independence — meaning the Trump administration would have to step back from some of its demands, like micromanaging hiring.
To those who would dismiss these ideas as liberal pablum, consider this: The Wall Street Journal's
Advertisement
Even
We agree. The president ran on pledges to strengthen America's industrial base and shrink its trade deficit, to control its borders, and to eliminate 'wokeness' from the federal bureaucracy. Permanently wounding one of the world's great universities, one that is also a magnet for international talent and a critical engine for the country's economy, wasn't particularly high on that agenda.
It's time to talk about ending this fight and getting on with more pressing issues. Who is willing to be the university's shuttle diplomat?
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Watch Live: House nearing final vote on Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Watch Live: House nearing final vote on Trump's "big, beautiful bill"

CBS News

time30 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Watch Live: House nearing final vote on Trump's "big, beautiful bill"

Washington — The House is nearing a final vote Thursday on President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" after Republican leaders overcame resistance from GOP holdouts in a dramatic overnight session and advanced the Senate version of the measure early Thursday morning. "We'll have the votes," House Speaker Mike Johnson said Thursday morning. "We'll land this plane before July 4th." Republicans are trying to approve the final version of the legislation ahead of the self-imposed Friday deadline to get the bill to the president's desk. After hours of delay, the House voted 219-213 to advance the bill, scoring a key victory for Johnson. Lawmakers began voting at about 9:30 p.m. EDT Wednesday, but didn't wrap up until about 3:20 a.m. Thursday, as GOP leaders and the White House spoke with holdouts for hours to overcome their objections. "What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove??? MAGA IS NOT HAPPY, AND IT'S COSTING YOU VOTES!!!" Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social shortly after midnight. Following the procedural vote, the House began debating the bill. Just before 5 a.m., House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries began addressing the chamber for a "magic minute," which allows the leader unlimited speaking time. Seven hours later, the New York Democrat is still addressing the chamber, pledging to "take his time" as he highlighted the Americans who he said would suffer because of the bill. "I rise today in strong opposition to Donald Trump's one, big ugly bill," Jeffries said as he began speaking. "This disgusting, abomination, the GOP tax scam, that guts Medicaid, rips food from the mouths of children, seniors and veterans, and rewards billionaires with massive tax breaks. Every single Democrat stands in strong opposition to this bill because we're standing up for the American people." Johnson is expected to speak after Jeffries concludes, followed by the final vote. House hardliners push back against Senate changes After the Senate approved the bill Tuesday, House GOP leaders had aimed to move ahead quickly on the signature legislation of Mr. Trump's second-term agenda, which includes ramped-up spending for border security, defense and energy production and extends trillions of dollars in tax cuts, partially offset by substantial cuts to health care and nutrition programs. But some House Republicans, who voted to pass an earlier version of the bill in May, were unhappy with the Senate's changes. Holdouts, including moderates and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, met with Mr. Trump on Wednesday as the White House pressured House Republicans to vote for the bill. While some lawmakers described the meetings as productive, a number of conservatives said ahead of a rule vote Wednesday afternoon that they thought the procedural vote would fail. Johnson spent weeks pleading with his Senate counterparts not to make any major changes to the version of the bill that passed the lower chamber by a single vote in May. He said the Senate bill's changes "went a little further than many of us would've preferred." The Senate-passed bill includes steeper Medicaid cuts, a higher increase in the debt limit and changes to the House bill's green energy policies and the state and local tax deduction. Other controversial provisions that faced pushback in both chambers, including the sale of public lands in nearly a dozen states, a 10-year moratorium on states regulating artificial intelligence and an excise tax on the renewable energy industry, were stripped from the Senate bill before heading back to the House. Before the critical procedural vote ended, Johnson told reporters that Mr. Trump was "directly engaged" in conversations with skeptical members. "Members wanted to hear certain assurances from him about what's ahead, what the future will entail, and what we're going to do next, and all of that," Johnson said. "And he was very, very helpful in that process." In the wee hours on Thursday, five House Republicans had voted no on the rule vote, which was enough to tank the vote with a razor-thin GOP majority in the lower chamber, and eight possible holdouts had not voted. But the vote remained open as GOP leaders worked to shore up support, allowing lawmakers to change their votes from no to yes. Mr. Trump had taken to Truth Social as a handful of Republican holdouts didn't appear to be budging, declaring "FOR REPUBLICANS, THIS SHOULD BE AN EASY YES VOTE. RIDICULOUS!!!" Republican leaders ultimately won the support of about a dozen GOP opponents to the rule. And when the vote finally came to an end, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania was the sole Republican opposed. , and contributed to this report.

Trump Wants to Expand Nuclear Power. It Won't Be Easy.
Trump Wants to Expand Nuclear Power. It Won't Be Easy.

Wall Street Journal

time31 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

Trump Wants to Expand Nuclear Power. It Won't Be Easy.

President Trump wants the U.S. power industry to go nuclear. His recent executive orders aim to quadruple nuclear-power generation in the next 25 years—a monumental target. For most of the past three decades, the industry has been managing ever-older assets instead of building new reactors. Developers are counting on a supply-chain revival and will have to prove they can deliver on time and on budget to drive interest in the sector.

Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill
Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill

Axios

time32 minutes ago

  • Axios

Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill

The overwhelming consensus on Capitol Hill was that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) would only delay President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" by about an hour. As noon approached on Thursday, that expectation was shattered. Why it matters: For months, the Democratic base has been demanding their party's leaders " fight harder" and use every tool at their disposal to stymie the GOP agenda. In the eyes of many lawmakers, this is Jeffries delivering. Jeffries blasted the GOP's marquee tax and spending bill as an "immoral document," vowing to "stand up and push back against it with everything we have on behalf of the American people." As of late Thursday morning, Jeffries was on track to surpass then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) record-breaking, 8-and-a-half hour speech to delay the Build Back Better vote in 2021. If Jeffries keeps speaking until 1:23pm ET, he will have set a new record. What we're hearing: One of Jeffries' central motivations, numerous Democratic sources told Axios, was to ensure that Republicans were forced to pass the bill during daylight hours and not in the dead of night. Jeffries said in his speech: "I ask the question, if Republicans were so proud of this one big, ugly bill, why did debate begin at 3:28am in the morning?" "This is about fighting for the American people ... forcing it into the daylight and telling some stories about the real impacts," House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told Axios. Zoom in: Jeffries spoke with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ahead of the speech to warn him about his plans, two sources familiar with the discussion told Axios on the condition of anonymity to share details of a private conversation. The House Democratic leader communicated that he was "just going to do an hour," one of the sources said, but that it "may be longer now." Another source said Jeffries made that decision "when he learned [Johnson] was going to stay all night until he got the votes." What he's saying: "Budgets are moral documents, and in our view ... budgets should be designed to lift people up," Jeffries said in his speech. "This reckless Republican budget that we are debating right now on the floor on the House of Representatives tears people down ... and every should vote 'no' against it," he said. Jeffries was consistently surrounded by dozens of House Democratic colleagues, who raucously applauded him throughout his speech. Yes, but: The Democratic leader did face a bit of frustration from his caucus for leaving even his inner circle in the dark about his plans. "No one is upset Hakeem wanted to do this, but to not tell members, 'be prepared, book multiple flights, be flexible,'" one House Democrat vented, grumbling that it is particularly hard to rebook flights around the July 4 holiday. Another House Democrat fumed that a "heads up would have been nice." Between the lines: Jeffries' marathon speech comes after Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) delivered a 25-hour filibuster in April that earned him plaudits from the Democrats' grassroots as a resistance hero. Later that month, Jeffries and Booker held a day-long sit-in on the Capitol steps in protest of Republicans' fiscal plans. The bottom line:"The base wants to see certain things and we have to show them those things, otherwise they don't believe we're fighting hard enough," another House Democrat told Axios of Jeffries' speech.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store