Boston: Harvard University appeared in federal court on Monday in a crucial case against the Trump administration, arguing that the US government illegally cut USD 2.6 billion in federal research funding. The university claimed the move was politically motivated and warned it could seriously harm its scientific and medical research operations.

Harvard says cuts could shut labs and derail careers

Harvard’s lawyer, Steven Lehotsky, told the court that the case revolves around the government’s attempt to control the “inner workings” of Harvard. He warned that if the funding freeze is not lifted, it could result in "the loss of research, damaged careers and the closing of labs."

The hearing was held before US District Judge Allison Burroughs, who is also presiding over other Harvard-related lawsuits, including previous attempts by the Trump administration to restrict the university’s ability to host international students.

Harvard is seeking to reverse the series of funding freezes that have put hundreds of ongoing research projects in jeopardy.

Government defends authority to pull grants

Representing the federal government, Michael Velchik argued that the administration has the legal right to cancel research grants if an institution fails to comply with presidential directives. He stated that specific episodes at Harvard had violated Trump’s executive order on combating antisemitism.

Judge questions lack of process and evidence

Judge Burroughs expressed concern about the government’s actions, saying it appeared to make “ad-hoc” decisions to cancel grants across the university without clear evidence.

She pointed out the lack of documentation or defined procedures to determine whether Harvard had done enough to address antisemitism.

"The consequences of that in terms of constitutional law are staggering," she said.

"I don't think you can justify a contract action based on impermissible suppression of speech. Where do I have that wrong?"

‘The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard’

Velchik denied any bias against Harvard, stating, "Harvard claims the government is anti-Harvard. I reject that. The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard. The government is pro-Jewish faculty at Harvard."

Harvard’s lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of launching a retaliation campaign after the university rejected sweeping demands laid out in an April 11 letter from a federal antisemitism task force.

The letter ordered Harvard to make significant changes to its campus, including auditing the political viewpoints of students and faculty, and hiring or admitting people to ensure more ideological diversity.

A second lawsuit, filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard chapter, has been combined with Harvard’s case.

“No government should dictate what we teach”

Harvard President Alan Garber has stated that the university has taken steps to address antisemitism. However, he pushed back against federal overreach, saying,"No government should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue."

Judge Burroughs did not issue a ruling from the bench during Monday’s hearing. A written judgement is expected at a later date.

Funding cuts followed letter rejection

The same day Harvard rejected the task force’s April letter, Trump officials froze USD 2.2 billion in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon later declared Harvard ineligible for new grants, and agencies soon began cancelling existing contracts.

While Harvard has tried to self-fund some research, the university, despite its USD 53 billion endowment, said it cannot fully cover the costs of the cuts.

In court filings, Harvard wrote, "The government fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism."

Trump administration denies retaliation

The Trump administration has denied that the funding freeze was retaliatory. It claims that the grants were already under review before the April letter and that the government has wide discretion to cancel funding based on policy shifts.

The legal fight over research grants is just one part of a broader standoff between Harvard and the Trump administration.

The White House has previously sought to prevent the university from hosting international students and has threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status.

Most recently, the administration formally declared that Harvard tolerated antisemitism on campus. This finding could jeopardise all federal funding, including student loans and grants—a punishment often called a “death sentence” in higher education circles.

(AP inputs)