The Trump Administration’s actions on higher education 

What appears below is a round-up of the major decisions, documents and other actions since Jan. 20 that have been undertaken by the Trump Administration that affect US higher education. It does not purport to be a comprehensive list, nor to offer various perspectives about whether the actions are good, bad or otherwise, or how they affect different Americans differently. It does not include actions by Congress other than the recent “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” and it does not include relevant actions by the US Supreme Court, by state governments, or most relevant actions by higher education institutions. Frankly, the US higher education industry is so large and diverse, and the federal government is so large and complex that probably no one can keep up with all the news.  

Jan. 20: According to Congress.gov, E.O. 14151 states that the Biden Administration “forced illegal and immoral discrimination programs, going by the name ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI), into virtually all aspects of the Federal Government in areas ranging from airline safety to the military.” Further, it states that executive agencies’ issuance of “Equity Action Plans” pursuant to E.O. 13985 and other Biden Administration initiatives demonstrated “immense public waste and shameful discrimination.” 

E.O. 14151 requires the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Attorney General, and the director of OPM to coordinate to terminate all DEI- and DEIA-related mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities across the federal government “under whatever name they appear.” It requires the OPM director and the Attorney General to review federal employment practices, union contracts, and training policies to comply with the E.O., and to ensure that federal employment practices do not “consider DEI or DEIA factors, goals, policies, mandates, or requirements.” In collaboration with the aforementioned officials, agency heads are required to complete a list of actions within 60 days of the issuance of the E.O., including 

• 1. terminating all DEI, DEIA, and “environmental justice” offices and positions; all “equity action plans,” equity actions, initiatives, or programs, equity-related grants or contracts; and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, or grantees; 
• 2. providing the OMB director with a list of DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” positions, committees, programs, services, activities, budgets, and expenditures; federal contractors who have provided DEI training or materials; and recipients of federal grants related to DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” programs, services, or activities; and 
• 3. assessing the impact and cost of prior DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” programs, services, or activities and recommending actions to align with the E.O.’s purpose as described in Section 1. 

The E.O. also requires the assistant to the President for domestic policy to meet with the OMB director, the OPM director, and agency heads to report on the prevalence and cost of DEI, DEIA, and “environmental justice” activities; discuss barriers to implementing this E.O.; and track progress on its implementation. 

President Trump’s E.O. “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” builds on E.O. 14151 by reaffirming the Administration’s commitment to ending DEI and DEIA practices government-wide. It requires agencies to “to terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements,” among other things. Notably, it revokes a number of executive orders, presidential memoranda, and other executive actions taken by previous Administrations including the Biden, Obama, Clinton, (G.W.) Bush, and Johnson. It also encourages the private sector to take steps to align with the Trump Administration’s views. 

Jan. 20: Executive Order purports to, as American Council of Education puts it, “increase vetting and screening of individuals seeking admission and already present in the United States. The EO also directs agencies to enhance vetting for those coming from countries with identified security risks, as well as, identifying admitted aliens and aliens already present in the United States ‘no not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.” 

Jan. 20: Leo Terrell hits the ground running in the Trump Justice Department, having been appointed on Jan. 9 by Trump as Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. He already has threatened Harvard, and he soon becomes chair of the Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism. 

Jan. 21: “Defending women form gender ideology extremism and restoring biological truth to the federal government”: Trump’s executive order says it’s “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. It is the Administration’s position that sexes are not interchangeable and that ‘sex’ is not a ‘synonym for and does not include the term “gender identity.”’ When administering or enforcing sex-based distinctions, every agency and all federal employees acting in an official capacity on behalf of their agency shall use the term ‘sex’ and not ‘gender’ in all applicable federal policies and documents. The EO further defines ‘gender identity’ as ‘an internal and subjective sense of self’ and directs agencies to take steps to eradicate use of the term and to implement regulations, guidance, forms and communications to comply with this order.” The first legal challenges to the executive order were filed on Jan. 30 

Jan. 29: Renews Dec. 11, 2019 Executive Order purporting to fight anti-semitism on college campuses, including actions by the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education. 

FEBRUARY 2025 

Feb. 3: Dept. of Justice forms a Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism and the US Dept. of Education starts to investigate give universities where supposedly “widespread antisemitic harassment has been reported.” The Health and Human Services Department announces investigations into four medical schools, including Harvard’s, after some graduates wore pro-Palestinian symbols during commencements. 

Feb. 5: Trump’s executive order requires that it is the “policy of the United States to oppose male competitive participation in women’s sports more broadly, as a matter of safety, fairness, dignity, and truth. Administration will take all appropriate action to protect affirmatively all-female athletic opportunities and all-female locker rooms, thereby providing the equal opportunity guaranteed by Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. Also rescinds U.S. support for and participation in people-to-people sports exchanges or other sports programs within which the relevant female sports category is based on identity and not sex.” The first legal challenge was filed Feb. 12. 

Feb. 6: Trump’s “Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias” executive order is supposedly written to “ensures that any unlawful and improper conduct, policies, or practices that target Christians are identified, terminated, and rectified. Also establishes a Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias within the Department of Justice.” 

Feb. 7: The National Institutes of Health imposed a 15% limit on indirect costs of research. This was quickly challenged in court by ACE, AAU, and APLU. 

Feb. 14: US Dept. of Education letter to colleges and universities says the Supreme Court decision in the Students for Fair Admission case, ruled that “Federal law thus prohibits WRITING HERE 

Feb. 15: An executive order from Trump (as per Akin Gump): “establishes a federal policy that prohibits the use of discretionary federal funds to support or subsidize educational institutions that require COVID-19 vaccinations for in-person attendance. It directs the Secretary of Education to issue guidelines to schools, educational agencies, and higher education institutions outlining the legal obligations of these entities regarding parental authority, religious freedom, disability accommodations, and equal protection under the law, as relevant to coercive COVID-19 school mandates.” 

Feb. 19: Trump’s executive order “ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit-based opportunity,” as Akin Gump puts it, “rescinds all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices or programs across all executive departments and agencies. It also revokes the following executive actions: Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations); Executive Order 13583 of August 18, 2011 (Establishing a Coordinated Government-wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce); Executive Order 13672 of July 21, 2014 (Further Amendments to Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government, and Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity); Presidential Memorandum of October 5, 2016 (Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in the National Security Workforce); and Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965 (Equal Employment Opportunity). Agencies must also work to end DEI initiatives in the private sector in areas of their jurisdiction.” Legal challenges it to started on Feb. 3, before it was even released. 

Feb. 21: “America First Investment Policy” Memorandum that says, “Administration will consider applying restrictions on investment types including private equity, venture capital, greenfield investments, corporate expansions, and investments in publicly traded securities, from sources including pension funds, university endowments, and other limited-partner investors.  It is past time for American universities to stop supporting foreign adversaries with their investment decisions, much as they should stop granting university access to supporters of terrorism.” 

Feb. 26: Trump’s Executive Order on DOGE, as Akin Gump summarizes it, requires the process [canceling or modifying current government contracts] to commence immediately and directs prioritization of the review of funds disbursed under covered contracts and grants to educational institutions and foreign entities for waste, fraud, and abuse. It also creates a 30-day credit card freeze, to the maximum extent permitted by law. An OMB and OPM memo the same day told all federal agencies to prepare for large-scale layoffs and restructuring. An earlier DOGE-driven executive order, on Feb. 19, was supposedly aimed at deregulation. 

MARCH 2025 

March 7: An executive order revises the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to ban those engaged in supposedly illegal activities such as advancing illegal immigration, terrorism, child abuse, discrimination, or “disruption.” 

March 8: Leo Terrell, senior counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, says universities have been “hijacked” by “leftists,” and he vows they will lose every dollar they receive from the federal government.  

March 10: Harvard and 59 other universities receive Education Department letters warning them to “protect Jewish students” or face federal punishment. 

March 14: Executive Order includes cuts for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars at the Smithsonian Institution, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services, among other agencies. 

March 20: Trump’s executive order, as Akin Gump puts it, “Orders steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities. The Secretary of Education shall ensure that the allocation of any Federal Department of Education funds is subject to rigorous compliance with Federal law and Administration policy, including the requirement that any program or activity receiving Federal assistance terminate illegal discrimination obscured under the label ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ or similar terms and programs promoting gender ideology.” Multiple legal challenges to this executive order starting March 13. 

March 31: More than $8.7 billion in federal funding to Harvard is put into government review. 

APRIL 2025 

April 9: Revoked security clearances of former federal employee Miles Taylor, plus individuals associated with him at the University of Pennsylvania. Taylor is called “egregious leaker and disseminator of falsehoods.” 

April 11: Federal government sends Harvard a letter alleging rampant antisemitism on campus. Trump Administration tells Harvard to change student discipline procedures, dump DEI practices, change governance, hiring and admissions practices; and yield to federal oversight, including a “viewpoint diversity”-oriented government auditor. The Harvard faculty chapter of the American Association of University Professors sues the Trump Administration on free speech and academic freedom grounds. 

April 14: Harvard University rejects Trump Administration’s April 11 demands, so Trump Administration freezes $2.2 billion in scientific and medical research funds from the federal government. 

April 16: Trump Administration asks IRS to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, cancels a $2.7 million grant from the Dept. of Homeland Security, and threatens to revoke Harvard’s ability to enroll international students. 

April 17: Education Secretary accuses Harvard of providing incomplete information about foreign gifts and contracts, and orders Harvard to turn over information about international students and foreign funding. 

April 18: National Science Foundation issues statement of its priorities: 

April 21: Harvard sues Trump Administration over federal funding freeze. 

April 23: Trump’s executive order on “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy stated, as Akin Gump puts it, “The use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts must be eliminated to avoid violating the Constitution and federal civil rights laws. Disparate-impact liability arises where a seemingly neutral policy or practice leads to unequal outcomes for different groups. The policy is scrutinized for its potential to have a disproportionately negative impact on protected groups, regardless of any intent to discriminate. The Presidential approval of July 25, 1966, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (31 Fed. Reg. 10269), as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(2) in full and the Presidential approval of July 5, 1973, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (38 Fed. Reg. 17955, FR Doc. 73-13407), as applied to the words “or effect” in both places they appear in 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(3), and as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(6)(ii) and 28 C.F.R. 42.104(c)(2) in full are revoked. Within 45 days of the Order the Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall assess all pending investigations, civil suits, or positions taken in ongoing matters under every federal civil rights law that relies on disparate-impact liability theory. Agencies responsible for enforcement of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act must evaluate pending proceedings relying on this theory within 45 days, and all agencies must evaluate existing judgements relying on the theory within 90 days.” 

April 23: Trump issued an executive order that Akin Gump, a Washington, D.C.-based law firm that requires the Secretary of Education “to take all appropriate actions to ensure complete and timely disclosure by higher education institutions of foreign funding. The Secretary will take appropriate steps to reverse or rescind any actions by the prior administration that permit higher education institutions to maintain improper secrecy regarding their foreign funding and require universities to disclose specific details about foreign funding. Audits and investigations will be conducted where appropriate to ensure compliance.” 

April 23: As Akin Gump, a Washington, D.C.-based law firm puts it, Trump issued an executive order that “Requires the Secretary of Education to hold accreditors accountable who fail to meet the applicable recognition criteria or otherwise violate Federal law, including by requiring accreditation seeking institutions to engage in diversity, equity, and inclusion practices through denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition. The Attorney General and Secretary of Education will investigate unlawful discrimination by American law schools advanced by the American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, and will also investigate, in conjunction with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, unlawful discrimination by American medical schools advanced by graduate medical education accreditors. Additionally, the Order institutes new principles of student-oriented accreditation, to realign with high-quality, valuable, education for students.” 

April 23: Trump issued executive order that, as Akin Gump says, is “to support Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in fostering more and better opportunities in higher education and ensuring college-educated Americans are empowered to advance common good. The Order establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to work with executive departments and agencies, the President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (established within the Order), and private sector organizations to increase the capacity of HBCUs to provide the highest-quality education. The Order revokes Executive Order 14041 of September 3, 2021, White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity Through Historically Black Colleges and Universities.” 

April 25: Trump Administration opens civil rights investigation into Harvard’s hiring practices. 

April 28: Executive order requires publication of local and state jurisdictions that the Trump Administration claims are obstructing enforcement of federal immigration law. It also claims to be able to, as the American Council of Education puts it, “halt state or local laws that favor undocumented individuals including state laws that favor undocumented individuals including state laws that provide in-state higher education tuition to aliens but not to out-of-state American citizens or that favor aliens in criminal charges or sentencing.” 

April 28: Trump administration starts investigation into Harvard Law Review, claiming editors considered race in article selection. The source is a former Law Review editor now working in the Trump White House. 

MAY 2025 

May 1: US Education Dept. changes approval process for higher education institutions wish to change accrediting agencies. 

May 2: National Science Foundation Policy Note: Implementation of Standard 15 percent Indirect Cost rate. Applies a standard indirect cost rate not to exceed 15 percent to call grants and cooperative agreements awarded to higher education institutions for which indirect costs are allowable. Only applies to new awards made after May 5, 2025.  On May 5, the American Council on Education, American Association of Universities, and APLU filed a lawsuit against this policy. A similar policy was started in the Department of Energy on April 11. 

May 2: National Endowment for the Arts terminated or rescinded grants already awarded in the 2025 fiscal year to a number of cultural institutions, including several nonprofit publishers and literary organizations. That same day, the Trump administration proposed eliminating the NEA, its sister agency the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute of Library and Museum Services in the national budget for the next fiscal year. Numerous employees have been terminated, asked to retire, or asked to resign. Grantees across the country received an email on May 2 from the NEA stating that their awards had been terminated effective May 31.  

May 5: Secretary of Education says federal government will stop all funding to Harvard based on the university’s supposed systematic pattern of violating federal law and failing to exercise “any semblance of academic rigor.” 

May 13: Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism cuts another $450 million in grants to Harvard. 

May 19: Dept. of Health & Human Services cuts another $60 million in grants to Harvard. 

May 22: US Dept. of Homeland Security terminates Harvard’s SEVP certification, which means it cannot enroll any international students. Reasons include “coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party” and not just alleged antisemitism. 

May 23: Harvard sues the Trump Administration over the ban of international students, and a federal judge temporarily blocks the administration’s action. On June 4, a Trump proclamation (which does not have force of law) suspends entry of international students going to Harvard on the claim that Harvard has not cooperated with Homeland Security. On June 5, a federal judge blocks the State Department from rejecting visa applications for people heading to Harvard, and on June 6, the State Department apparently complies. 

May 23: Executive order in part “increase access to research and development infrastructure, workforce, and expertise at Department of Energy National Laboratories for college and university students studying nuclear engineering and other nuclear energy-related fields, and Department of Defense personnel affiliated with nuclear energy programs.” 

May 26: Trump suggests cutting $3 billion more from grants to Harvard and giving the money to trade schools. 

May 27: The General Services Administration tells all federal agencies to review their contracts with Harvard. 

May 30: State Department says it will give extra vetting to visas to everyone heading to Harvard. 

JUNE 2025 

June 4: Proclamation says that Harvard is “no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs” because of extensive ties with China, not focusing on on-campus crime rates, and other reasons, and stops international students from coming to Harvard for at least six months. 

June 4: Executive order bans US entry of nationals from 12 countries and partially restricts US entry of nationals from seven other countries. 

June 10: The National Endowment for the Humanities laid off about 108 employees, about two-thirds of its work force, since April, when it was announced that about 80% of NEH staff were put on administrative leave, after terminating more than 1,000 existing NEH grants and announcing that in 2026, it would make only half as many grants. 

June 10: House Republicans say they will investigate Harvard’s hiring practices. 

June 24: The White House claims its trying to negotiate with Harvard a month before they face off in federal court. 

June 25: The National Science Foundation staff canceled 1,700 grants and proposed a 57% cut to the agency’s next budget. Dozens of staff members have been fired. The Trump Administration also announced that NSF would be kicked out of its 8-year-old, 19-story building in Alexandria, VA, but NSF was not told where it would go. 

June 30: Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism notifies Harvard that the university is in “violent violation” of federal civil rights laws for not protecting Jewish students on campus. Harvard’s new court filing says the Joint Task Force has not conducted any “meaningful investigation.” 

JULY 2025 

July 4: Trump signed his “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” which has a number of effects on US higher education. As National Public Radio put it: 

Borrowers working toward a professional graduate degree (i.e. medical or law school) will have their borrowing capped at $50,000 a year, and their lifetime cap increased from $138,500 to $200,000. Parents and caregivers who use PLUS loans to help students pay for college will also see new loan limits. They will be capped at $20,000 a year and, in aggregate, at $65,000 per child. 

The law also sets a new lifetime borrowing limit, for undergraduate and graduate loans, at $257,500 per person. 

Republicans agreed to make big changes to repayment plans too, phasing out most of them, including the generous, Biden-era SAVE plan. 

After July 1, 2026, new borrowers will have just two repayment options: 1.) A new income-based plan that requires borrowers to pay at least $10 a month and offers loan cancellation after 30 years of repayment, or 2) a new standard repayment plan with fixed monthly payments over 10-25 years – the larger the debt, the longer the repayment window. 

Older and current borrowers will have a few more choices, at least for the time being, which will no doubt stir confusion among borrowers and the loan servicing companies that have to make sense of all these changes…. 

Changes to Pell Grants for low-income college students 

The bill expands Pell Grants, which help low-income students pay for college, to include job-training programs, which is a win for community colleges which offer a variety of certificate programs. It also tweaks eligibility for all Pell recipients: Starting in July 2026, students who have a full-ride scholarship will no longer be eligible to receive Pell Grants. The bill also fully funds the existing Pell Grant shortfall. 

An accountability earnings test for colleges 

To incentivize colleges to provide a good return on investment, the bill connects schools’ access to federal student loans to how much their graduates earn. 

If an undergraduate program fails the earnings test – which means their students earn less than someone with a high school diploma – it could lose access to federal loans. One analysis shows this would have the most impact on two-year associate degree programs, though federal data shows community college students are less reliant on federal student loans. 

The measure follows in the footsteps of a similar regulation known as the gainful employment rule which was developed by the Obama administration and reissued under Biden. 

The final version of this new accountability policy doesn’t go as far as the House version did – that draft included a risk-sharing plan where colleges would pay a penalty based on the federal loan debt their students fail to repay. 

A higher tax on college endowments 

Colleges with endowments will now be taxed at a higher rate. 

The bill raises the tax rate from 1.4% to as high as 8%, depending on the college’s endowment. 

The endowment of Harvard University, which is currently fighting multiple legal battles against the Trump administration, totals more than $52 billion. Based on the new law’s formula, that puts Harvard in the highest endowment tax bracket, for institutions with an endowment of more than $2 million per domestic student. 

There is a carveout for small private colleges: Institutions with fewer than 3,000 students are exempted from the tax. The previous exemption was 500 students. 

July 9: The Education and Health & Human Services departments tell Harvard’s accreditor that the university violated civil rights law and may fail accreditation requirements. 

July 14: from the Associated Press:  

WASHINGTON–The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump to put his plan to dismantle the Education Department back on track — and to go through with laying off nearly 1,400 employees. 

With the three liberal justices in dissent, the court on Monday paused an order from U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston, who issued a preliminary injunction reversing the layoffs and calling into question the broader plan. The layoffs “will likely cripple the department,” Joun wrote. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. 

The high court action enables the administration to resume work on winding down the department, one of Trump’s biggest campaign promises. 

In a post Monday night on his social media platform, Trump said the high court “has handed a Major Victory to Parents and Students across the Country.” He said the decision will allow his administration to begin the “very important process” of returning many of the department’s functions “BACK TO THE STATES.” 

The court did not explain its decision in favor of Trump, as is customary in emergency appeals. But in dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor complained that her colleagues were enabling legally questionable action on the part of the administration. 

“When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it,” Sotomayor wrote for herself and Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan. 

Education Secretary Linda McMahon said it’s a “shame” it took the Supreme Court’s intervention to let Trump’s plan move ahead. 

“Today, the Supreme Court again confirmed the obvious: the President of the United States, as the head of the Executive Branch, has the ultimate authority to make decisions about staffing levels, administrative organization, and day-to-day operations of federal agencies,” McMahon said in a statement. 

A lawyer for the Massachusetts cities and education groups that sued over the plan said the lawsuit will continue, adding no court has yet ruled that what the administration wants to do is legal. 

“Without explaining to the American people its reasoning, a majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have dealt a devastating blow to this nation’s promise of public education for all children. On its shadow docket, the Court has yet again ruled to overturn the decision of two lower courts without argument,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement…. 

Education Department employees who were targeted by the layoffs have been on paid leave since March, according to a union that represents some of the agency’s staff. 

Joun’s order had prevented the department from fully terminating them, though none had been allowed to return to work, according to the American Federation of Government Employees Local 252. Without Joun’s order, the workers would have been terminated in early June. 

The Education Department had said earlier in June that it was “actively assessing how to reintegrate” the employees. A department email asked them to share whether they had gained other employment, saying the request was meant to “support a smooth and informed return to duty.” 

The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Trump’s plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. 

One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other legal action was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. 

The suits argued that layoffs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. 

July 9: from WBUR (by Emily Piper-Vallillo): “Trump administration takes aim at Harvard’s accreditation status” 

Federal agencies ratcheted up the pressure on Harvard University Wednesday, telling the region’s accrediting body that the Cambridge school is in violation of anti-discrimination laws and “may fail to meet the standards for accreditation” set by the body. 

A university must be accredited for its students to access federal education grants and loans. 

This latest action is part of the Trump administration’s sweeping assault on Harvard — and higher education more broadly — in an attempt to reshape academia in line with its political goals. 

The move, announced in a joint press release from the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Health and Human Services, follows the results of a federal investigation released in June that found Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by allegedly permitting a hostile environment for Jewish students dating back to Oct. 7, 2023. 

In a statement, U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the school allowed “anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus.” 

Harvard leaders denounced the allegations — and the administration’s latest action. 

“Harvard has made significant strides to combat bigotry, hate and bias,” a university spokesman said in a statement Wednesday. “Harvard continues to comply with the New England Commission of Higher Education’s Standards for Accreditation, maintaining its accreditation uninterrupted since its initial review in 1929.” 

President Trump said on the campaign trail the college accreditation system is his “secret weapon” for overhauling American higher education. He issued an executive order in April directing McMahon to revamp the accreditation process and hold accrediting bodies accountable by suspending or terminating their authority if they sign off on universities with “diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.” 

The federal government cannot strip a school of its accreditation or direct an accrediting body to do so. And a finding of a civil rights violation does not automatically mean a university will lose its accreditation. 

But the U.S. Department of Education can investigate schools, and accreditors are required to notify universities if they fail to meet accreditation standards and create a plan for the school to return to compliance, according to the federal agencies’ announcement. 

Accreditors must also be “recognized” by the U.S. Department of Education. 

The federal government sent a similar letter last month to the accrediting agency for Columbia University, accusing the school of violating civil rights laws. The Middle States Commission on Higher Education recently warned Columbia of non-compliance and has required the school to submit a “monitoring report” by November, to be followed by a visit from accreditation officials. The commission said it “anticipates” reviewing the school’s accreditation status at its next meeting in March 2026. 

There is a longstanding process for addressing a university accused of civil rights violations, said Jon Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations at the American Council on Education. But, he said, the government is not following that process by going after Harvard’s accreditation. 

“It’s really an inappropriate overreach by the administration,” Fansmith said. “They’re attempting to impose political goals into a process that’s not political.” 

The goal of accreditation is to make sure students are getting a quality education, he said. “Nobody” disputes that Harvard is providing that, and it would be “shocking” if Harvard were to lose its accreditation status this way, Fansmith said. 

Losing accreditation matters for universities and their students, said Jan Friis, senior vice president of government affairs at the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Students would no longer be able to use Pell Grants and federal student loans to fund their education. 

“That really impacts the students a great deal,” Friis said. “And over time it impacts the institution because many institutions receive a great deal of federal student aid money.” 

Harvard, which is accredited by the non-governmental New England Commission of Higher Education, is due for a review in 2027, according to the university website. 

July 13: The New York Times’ writers on “How Trump’s crackdown on universities is affecting the world”: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/07/13/us/2025-06-06-int-science-reaction-index.html 

July 18: From the American Council on Education: “Progress made on associations’ work advancing new indirect costs model​. As lawmakers prepare to leave town for the August recess, the FY 2026 congressional appropriations process is behind schedule, including for the massive bill funding the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related agencies that contains much of the annual funding for higher education programs. House leaders have postponed marking up that bill until September, even as they released proposed spending levels that include a nearly 6 percent cut to nondefense programs and a $1.3 billion reduction for the Labor-HHS-Education area. The Senate still plans to mark up its version Aug. 1. 

“In addition, after final passage this week of President Trump’s requested $9 billion in rescissions targeting previously approved funding for programs such as foreign aid and public broadcasting, the White House has promised to send up additional rescission packages to put into statute the cuts made by DOGE and the administration in the first six months. With this complicated landscape, a so-called continuing resolution extending current funding into the next fiscal year appears likely. 

“On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee advanced its FY 2026 Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) bill on a party-line vote. While the legislation largely tracks with the administration’s vision, it poses real risks to the future of American research and international collaboration. 

“The legislation includes a 23 percent cut to the National Science Foundation (NSF), which is a $2 billion reduction from the current funding level. While not as deep as the 55 percent cut proposed in President Trump’s FY 2026 budget, it would still significantly weaken U.S. research competitiveness and undercut investments in innovation. NASA would be flat funded at $24.8 billion. It also contains a directive to reestablish the Justice Department’s China Initiative, a program broadly criticized for its chilling effect on academic collaboration and its disproportionate targeting of researchers of Chinese descent. ACE has previously expressed concerns about the reestablishment of this initiative.  

“The Senate Appropriations Committee took a more balanced approach in consideration of its version of the CJS bill. Senators from both parties pushed back on the administration’s proposed science cuts and reaffirmed the importance of strong federal investments in research and data infrastructure. 

“The Senate bill includes $9.55 billion for NSF, a 5.4 percent increase over FY 2024 (the funding level of which remains in force still because of a continuing resolution). 

“Indirect costs rate: The Senate measure also includes language that would block the Department of Commerce, NSF, and NASA from making sudden changes to the indirect costs rate, also known as the facilities and administrative (F&A) costs of conducting research, and encourages the administration to work with the higher education community in considering changes. This builds on the work of the Joint Associations Group, which includes ACE, in advancing a new model for F&A costs. 

“As the appropriations process moves forward, ACE and other advocates will be pushing hard to secure the strongest possible research funding in the final FY 2026 package.” 

July 21: In the AAUP case, with both sides asking for a summary judgment without trial, a federal judge heard Harvard lawyers say that the federal government’s reasons for withholding billions in federal funding were “cooked up” and unconstitutional. Journalists covering the hearing reported that the judge seemed sympathetic to Harvard’s arguments that the federal government was wrong in both its process and the result. 

Compiled by Dr. Dane S. Claussen, NCA Director of Research, Publications and Professional Advancement.