Trump administration reviewing alleged antisemitism at Harvard University
Leonid Andronov via Getty Images
(BOSTON) — The Department of Education and other agencies are reviewing Harvard University for fostering antisemitism on its campus, Secretary Linda McMahon said Monday.
“Harvard’s failure to protect students on campus from anti-Semitic discrimination — all while promoting divisive ideologies over free inquiry — has put its reputation in serious jeopardy,” McMahon said in a release.
“Harvard can right these wrongs and restore itself to a campus dedicated to academic excellence and truth-seeking, where all students feel safe on its campus,” she said.
The Education Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and the General Services Administration are joining in the comprehensive review of the school.
The move comes as the administration’s joint task force doubles down on removing antisemitic conduct and harassment from elite universities. The administration stripped Columbia University of $400 million in grants earlier this month after a task force investigation found inaction by the school to protect Jewish students.
Monday’s actions against Harvard come after a similar review led to Columbia agreeing to comply with nine preconditions for further negotiations regarding a return of canceled federal funds, according to the release.
The task force will review hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to Harvard and its affiliates, according to the release.
The agencies will also review another nearly $9 billion in grants to Harvard to ensure it’s in compliance with “federal regulations” and “civil rights responsibilities,” the release said.
In response to the review, Harvard President Alan Garber released a statement saying, “We fully embrace the important goal of combatting antisemitism, one of the most insidious forms of bigotry.”
“It is present on our campus,” Garber continued, “I have experienced antisemitism directly, even while serving as president, and I know how damaging it can be to a student who has come to learn and make friends at a college or university.”
Garber said, however, that the $9 billion in federal funding that is “at stake” as the university works to combat antisemitism could halt “life-saving research and imperil important scientific research and innovation.”
“As an institution and as a community, we acknowledge our shortcomings, pursue needed change, and build stronger bonds that enable all to thrive,” Garber added.
Harvard alum Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., told ABC News he believes too many universities have gone unchecked for tent encampments and hostile demonstrations that involved students overtaking buildings on campus in response to the Israel-Hamas conflict that broke out after Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Kiley, who sits on the House Education and Workforce Committee, called the administration’s review “incredibly refreshing” and a proactive solution to protect the civil rights and safety of Harvard’s Jewish students.
“We need to make sure that the rules are enforced, that civil rights laws are abided by and that there are consequences for illegal activity,” Kiley said.
Oregon Democratic Rep. Suzanne Bonamici is also a member of the Education and Workforce Committee and alongside Rep. Kiley, Bonamici serves on the subcommittee on higher education.
Bonamici told ABC News she believes the administration has been pushing a concerning attack on institutions of higher education.
She said threatening federal funding is a bridge too far. “There are ways to address anti-Semitism that don’t involve this type of threat,” Bonamici said, adding, “What they’re trying to do is intimidate these universities, like they’re doing with law firms, intimidate them into taking positions that are antithetical to higher education and free thought and critical thinking, so it’s extremely concerning.”
Protests erupted on college campuses around the country after civilian casualties mounted in Gaza as Israel launched a military campaign in response to Oct. 7, vowing to eradicate Hamas — which the U.S. has designated a terrorist organization.
The federal response comes after President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing McMahon to abolish the Department of Education and another order that takes measures to “vigorously” combat antisemitism.
The Harvard review also highlights the administration’s promise to ensure colleges would suffer the federal consequences if they foster antisemitic protests and demonstrations in the wake of Oct. 7.
On the campaign trail, Trump said, “My promise to Jewish Americans is this: With your vote, I will be your defender, your protector, and I will be the best friend Jewish Americans have ever had in the White House.”
Meanwhile, Congress is investigating Harvard and nearly a dozen other schools for allegedly fostering antisemitism on campus.
A House Education and Workforce Committee report last fall found many universities have failed to adequately discipline antisemitic conduct. A summary of the more than 100-page report alleges the “overwhelming majority” of students accused of antisemitic harassment or other acts of antisemitism on campuses faced minimal disciplinary action for their alleged violations.
(WASHINGTON) — Federal judges have been blunt in their rulings from the bench as the Trump administration has been hit with numerous lawsuits challenging its policies, layoffs and firings and other orders.
While many of the cases are still working their way through the system, several federal judges have been swift in issuing temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, questioning the legality and constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s actions.
The president and his allies, including billionaire Elon Musk, whose Department of Government Efficiency has been at the center of some of the suits, have dismissed many of the orders in interviews and on social media. Musk has called for the impeachment of multiple judges, and Trump has also called for the impeachment of Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Boasberg has called on the administration to stop deporting Venezuelans as part of Trump’s executive order that invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime authority used to deport noncitizens with little to no due process, as a lawsuit plays out.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Justice Department on behalf of five Venezuelans contending the deportees were not criminals. The judge argued that the accused deportees could face real harm and granted the TRO.
Several of the judges have faced increased harassment and threats, according to the U.S. Marshals Service and sources with knowledge of the situation.
Here are some of the major rulings issued by judges against the administration.
March 21
Boasberg said during a court hearing over the AEA deportations of Venezuelan migrants to an El Salvadorian prison that the administration’s use of the law was “incredibly troublesome and problematic.”
“I agree it’s an unprecedented and expanded use of an act that has been used … in the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, when there was no question there was a declaration of war and who the enemy was,” Boasberg said.
The judge noted that the Trump administration’s arguments about the extent of the president’s power are “awfully frightening” and a “long way from” the intent of the law.
The Trump administration argued that members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and the gang’s national security risk warranted the use of the 18th century act.
Boasberg vowed to hold the Trump administration accountable, if necessary, if it violated his court order from March 15.
“The government’s not being terribly cooperative at this point, but I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my word and who ordered this and what’s the consequence,” he said.
Boasberg also grilled Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign over his compliance with the court order to turn back the flights already in the air and questioned how the deportation flights were put together.
“Why is this proclamation essentially signed in the dark on Friday night, early Saturday morning, when people [were] rushed on the plane?” Boasberg asked. “To me, the only reason to do that is if you know the problem and you want to get them out of the country before a suit is filed.”
“I don’t have knowledge of those operational details,” Ensign said.
Boasberg also raised concerns that the rapid nature of the deportations prevented the men from being able to challenge the allegations that they belonged to Tren de Aragua.
“[What] they’re simply saying is don’t remove me, particularly to a country that’s going to torture me,” Boasberg said.
An attorney for the ACLU argued that those targeted by the AEA should be able to contest whether they fall within the act.
“Otherwise, anybody could be taken off the street and removed,” said Lee Gelernt, the attorney for the ACLU. “This is a very dangerous road we’re going down.”
As Ensign appeared to undermine arguments made earlier in the week about the timing of the order and struggled to answer Boasberg’s questions, the judge suggested the Department of Justice might be risking its reputation and credibility.
“I often tell my clerks before they go out into the world to practice law, the most valuable treasure they possess is their reputation and their credibility,” Boasberg said. “I just ask you make sure your team [understands] that lesson.”
Boasberg decided on March 24 that the men who were deported were entitled to due process in court.
“Federal courts are equipped to adjudicate that question when individuals threatened with detention and removal challenge their designation as such. Because the named Plaintiffs dispute that they are members of Tren de Aragua, they may not be deported until a court has been able to decide the merits of their challenge,” he wrote.
Later that evening, the Trump administration invoked the “state secrets privilege” in a court filing to attempt to stop the federal judge from learning more information about the flights.
“Removal flight plans-including locations from which flights depart, the planes utilized, the paths they travel, where they land, and how long they take to accomplish any of those things–reflect critical means and methods of law enforcement operations,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in the filing.
March 20
U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander slammed DOGE in a 137-page ruling that blocked the group’s unlimited access to Social Security information.
“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack,” she wrote.
“The government has not even attempted to explain why a more tailored, measured, titrated approach is not suitable to the task,” Hollander added. “Instead, the government simply repeats its incantation of a need to modernize the system and uncover fraud. Its method of doing so is tantamount to hitting a fly with a sledgehammer.”
The White House has not commented on the case as of March 25.
Reyes said the policy continued an unfortunate history of the armed services excluding marginalized people from the “privilege of serving.”
“The President has the power — indeed the obligation — to ensure military readiness. At times, however, leaders have used concern for military readiness to deny marginalized persons the privilege of serving,” Reyes wrote.
“[Fill in the blank] is not fully capable and will hinder combat effectiveness; [fill in the blank] will disrupt unit cohesion and so diminish military effectiveness; allowing [fill in the blank] to serve will undermine training, make it impossible to recruit successfully, and disrupt military order,” she added.
“First minorities, then women in combat, then gays filled in that blank. Today, however, our military is stronger and our Nation is safer for the millions of such blanks (and all other persons) who serve,” she said.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has slammed the judge on X and vowed to appeal.
Lawyers for the administration argued in court papers that the court “has broadly construed the scope of the DoD Policy to encompass all trans-identifying servicemembers or applicants” and claimed the Department of Defense’s new guidance “underscores Defendants’ consistent position that the DoD Policy is concerned with the military readiness, deployability, and costs associated with a medical condition — one that every prior Administration has, to some degree, kept out of the military.”
March 13
U.S. District Judge William Alsup scolded a DOJ attorney during a hearing for a lawsuit against the mass firing of federal workers.
Alsup slammed the attorney for refusing to make acting Office of Personnel Management Director Charles Ezell available for cross-examination and withdrawing his sworn declaration, which Alsup called a “sham.”
“The government, I believe, has tried to frustrate the judge’s ability to get at the truth of what happened here and then set forth sham declarations,” Alsup said. “That’s not the way it works in the U.S. District Court.”
“You will not bring the people in here to be cross-examined. You’re afraid to do so because you know cross-examination would reveal the truth. This is the U.S. District Court,” Alsup said. “I tend to doubt that you’re telling me the truth.”
Alsup bashed the government for submitting a declaration from Ezell he believed to be false but then withdrawing it and making Ezell unavailable for testimony.
“You withdrew his declaration rather than do that. Come on, that’s a sham. It upsets me,” Alsup said. “I want you to know that I’ve been practicing or serving in this court for over 50 years and I know how that we get at the truth, and you’re not helping me get to add to the truth. You’re giving me press releases, sham documents.”
Alsup later ruled that thousands of federal workers needed to be rehired.
The judge determined the Trump administration attempted to circumvent the procedures in place for issuing reductions in force by asserting that the employees were terminated for performance reasons without providing evidence.
“I just want to say it is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie,” he said. “That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements.”
If the Trump administration wants to reduce the size of the federal government, it needs to follow the process established in federal law, he said.
“The words that I give you today should not be taken as some kind of wild and crazy judge in San Francisco has said that the administration cannot engage in a reduction in force,” he said.
His ruling is being appealed by the administration, which asked the Supreme Court on March 24 for an emergency stay.
Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argued in her filing that the labor unions and nonprofit groups that challenged the mass firings lack standing, saying they have “hijacked the employment relationship between the federal government and its workforce.”
“This Court should not allow a single district court to erase Congress’s handiwork and seize control over reviewing federal personnel decisions — much less do so by vastly exceeding the limits on the scope of its equitable authority and ordering reinstatements en masse,” she wrote.
Jan. 23
Just days into Trump’s second presidency, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour issued a temporary restraining order blocking Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship and expressed shock in the order from the president.
“I have been on the bench for over four decades,” said Coughenour, who was nominated to the bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1981. “I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as it is here. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order.”
“I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar can state unequivocally that this is a constitutional order. It boggles my mind,” the judge told the DOJ’s attorney during the hearing. “Where were the lawyers when this decision was being made?”
The Trump administration has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.
Harris, the acting solicitor general, argued in a filing to the Supreme Court that the nationwide injunctions “transgress constitutional limits on courts’ powers” and “compromise the Executive Branch’s ability to carry out its functions.”
“This Court should declare that enough is enough before district courts’ burgeoning reliance on universal injunctions becomes further entrenched,” she wrote.
ABC News’ Emily Chang and Laura Romero contributed to this report.
Former United States Agency for International Development (USAID) employees/Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Thousands of federal workers nationwide have been forced out of their jobs by the Trump administration as Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency’s says it aims to improve the government and cut down waste.
From park rangers and Department of Veterans Affairs social workers to scientists and foreign relations experts, the workers have decades of experience and knowledge that are crucial to their fields.
With that wealth of knowledge and experience, labor and security experts told ABC News that those fired federal workers are being recruited by private firms and foreign governments, which they said raises the risk of security threats against the United States.
“From an intelligence and law enforcement perspective, the potential for foreign intelligence forces to recruit government workers is hot,” said John Cohen, an ABC News contributor and former acting undersecretary for intelligence at the Department of Homeland Security.
At the same time, state and local governments could step up to fill in their offices with that talent as President Donald Trump seeks to shift many roles and responsibilities out of the federal government.
“It would be an easy transition for them and, in the end, benefit the public, which needs their experience now,” Victor Narro, a professor of labor studies at the Labor Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, told ABC News.
Workers ripe for the picking by private sector
Narro, who has worked in Los Angeles city public boards and commissions and on a U.S. Agency for International Development project, said one of the biggest things being overlooked in DOGE’s mass firings is the fact that many of these employees had strong training from top colleges and chose to have a career in public office instead of the private sector.
“A lot of public sector employees give up jobs in the private sector because they care about being a public worker,” he said. “They all know they could have made a lot more money and had more benefits.” What federal workers may lack in salary, they can make up in connections with policymakers and organizations, as well as access to government data and knowledge. It is common for federal workers who leave the public sector to take that knowledge to private sector jobs, such as consulting firms that specialize in the environment, national security and healthcare, Cohen said.
The unprecedented mass firing of federal workers may lead to the creation of new private sector organizations made up of those workers, Cohen said.
“It would be hard to think that those employees wouldn’t be in demand,” he said.
In fact, billionaire Mark Cuban pitched an idea in a post on March 1 that those fired workers band together and start their own consulting company.
“It’s just a matter of time before DOGE needs you to fix the mess they inevitably created. They will have to hire your company as a contractor to fix it. But on your terms. I’m happy to invest and/or help,” the Shark Tank host wrote.
There have been no public updates about Cuban’s proposal since the post as of March 18.
Foreign national threat increased
Cohen said Cuban’s proposal has some merit, but he warned that not everyone offering a helping hand will have altruistic intentions.
In fact, he warned offers could very well be ruses designed by foreign adversaries.
Cohen said counterintelligence operations throughout history have targeted disgruntled federal employees who are left in despair and with no way to pay off their expenses and debts.
Each fired worker, from those at the Social Security Administration, who have knowledge about the U.S. benefits system, to nuclear engineers, could be a perfect asset to intelligence agencies in Russia, China and other nations, Cohen said.
Additionally, general knowledge about the inner workings of federal offices, personalities of top officials and other information could be appealing to adversaries, he said.
“It’s not just classified information that is valuable,” he said.
Cohen said Trump and Musk’s belittling of the federal workers as lazy, inefficient and not useful for the government will help make it easier for foreign recruiters to make their case.
“It’s a standard recruitment tool. You find that sense of grievance, you fan the flames and you get them to cooperate because they are angry at what was done to them,” he said.
Those same operations have also found success through more shady tactics, Cohen said.
He noted that there have been cases where federal employees have unknowingly worked for foreign governments posing as private U.S. companies or have been closely working with legitimate companies already operating in the U.S., clouding evidence of foreign intervention.
“It could be something as simple as offering someone to write a research paper and pay a lot for it or give a speech at a conference,” Cohen said. “From there, it could lead to something long term.”
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey told reporters at news conferences this week that this is playing out in her state, saying on Wednesday, “What has happened is you have other governments, from China, from the Middle East, from around the world, coming into this country, coming into campuses in Massachusetts and basically saying, ‘Hey the federal government is going to take away your funding and take away your research come to our country. We’ll give you a lab. We’ll set you up. We’ll give you a staff. And you can pioneer the new technologies on our shores.'”
“That’s not putting America first,” she added.
Typically, the federal government prompts workers to do their due diligence and refrain from working with anyone appearing to have foreign government ties, but Cohen said it is going to be difficult to self-police this on such a massive scale.
“The government has to rely on someone’s patriotism and their sense of ethics to willingly not support a foreign intelligence service. But very often, a person may not know they are being recruited,” he said.
State, local governments to the rescue?
The recruitment efforts, however, aren’t limited to foreign entities and private companies. State and local governments are now seeking to fill their offices with the displaced talent.
Earlier this month, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced the “You’re Hired” campaign, which encourages fired federal workers to go to New York and apply for jobs in various state agencies. The state placed ads in Union Station that redirected them to a website with state job offerings.
“We’re looking for qualified, experienced candidates across a wide variety of fields. I need technologists, I need engineers, I need attorneys, healthcare workers, educators, public policy experts and so many more,” Hochul told reporters at a news conference on March 3.
“I’m in competition for the top attorneys, the top engineers [and] people to work at the Department of Financial Services,” she added. “In a place like New York City, there’s a lot of higher-paying jobs. So these are special people who walk away from those jobs and those opportunities and come here, and I want to let them know that we will take care of them.”
As of March 18, over 200 people have signed up for webinars hosted by the New York State Department of Labor, according to the governor’s office.
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, have started similar campaigns.
Narro said it is not surprising that local governments would take the opportunity to fill their offices, given that many are now bracing for extra responsibilities following the DOGE cuts.
At the same time, there is no guarantee that those local governments can take in all of those workers, he said.
“A lot of it depends on the state. You have a better chance of getting a public job in New York versus Iowa because of the number of offices, departments and ultimately the budget,” Narro said.
Cohen and Narro added that Trump’s pledge to give more power to the states, particularly education, but no details on how they would get the funding to do so has also left many states in limbo when it comes to recruitment.
“It’s great that the states are coming up with these programs, but if they can’t commit, you’re going to have more frustrated federal workers,” Cohen said.
Can the damage be undone? Narro noted that the situation with fired federal workers is still fluid as court cases play out and some of the firings have been stopped or reversed.
However, the uncertainty alone could be devastating to the future of the federal workforce.
“People’s families depend on stability, and if they can not keep up with the changing decisions, they may just quit altogether,” Narro said. “I suspect this is what Trump and Musk are seeking to do in their strategy.”
Narro said that even if Trump’s and Musk’s policies are reversed by a future administration, there could be long-term damage.
“In the end of the day, the public loses out the most,” he said. “It’s going to be harder for anyone to consider giving up a private job and dedicating their talents to serving the public if this is how they will be treated.”
(WASHINGTON) — Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer announced Thursday night that he plans to vote to keep the government open, signaling that there will almost certainly be enough Democratic votes to advance a House GOP funding bill before a shutdown deadline at the end of the day Friday.
In remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer conceded a government shutdown is the worse outcome.
“While the Republican bill is very bad, the potential for a shutdown has consequences for America that are much much worse. For sure, the Republican bill is a terrible option,” he said. “It is not a clean CR” or continuing resolution, he said. “It is deeply partisan. It doesn’t address far too many of this country’s needs, but I believe allowing Donald Trump to take even much more power in a government shutdown is a far worse option.”
Schumer’s announcement amounted to a major break from House Democrats who voted nearly unanimously against the GOP funding bill earlier this week. Following Schumer’s remarks, top House Democrats released a joint statement reiterating that they remain “strongly opposed” to the GOP funding bill and say instead they support a four-week spending bill that would allow lawmakers to continue negotiating.
In his remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer argued Republicans are to blame for a “Hobson’s choice” that “brought us to the brink of disaster.”
“Unless Congress acts, the federal government will shut down tomorrow at midnight. I have said many times there are no winners in a government shutdown. But there are certainly victims: the most vulnerable Americans who rely on federal programs to feed their families to access medical care and to stay financially afloat,” Schumer said.
A decision to shut down the government would give President Donald Donald Trump and his senior adviser Elon Musk too much power to continue their federal worker cuts without discretion, he asserted.
“A shutdown would give Donald Trump and Elon musk carte blanche to destroy vital government services at a significantly faster rate than they can right now. Under as shutdown the Trump administration would have full authority to deem whole agencies programs an personnel nonessential, furloughing staff with no promise they would ever be rehired,” Schumer said. “In short: a shut down would give Donald Trump Elon musk and DOGE the keys to the city state and country.”
Earlier Thursday, Schumer told his Democratic colleagues during a closed-door lunch that he would vote to clear a path for final passage of a House-GOP funding bill, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.
That move would clear the way for Republicans to pass the bill with a simple majority.
Senate Democrats remained tight-lipped after huddling behind closed doors ahead of the fast-approaching government funding deadline.
“What happens in caucus, stays in caucus,” Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin said as she left the weekly lunch.
“Ask somebody else,” Democratic Sen. Cory Booker grumbled.
“I don’t have any comment,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Several Democrats have privately admitted they likely don’t have the votes to block a Republican proposal to keep the government funded through September, multiple sources told ABC News.
Tensions were on full display at the private meeting. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand was yelling so loudly about the impact of a shutdown that reporters could hear her through the walls.
One Democrat who spoke on the condition of anonymity told ABC News, “We lost this two weeks ago … we should’ve been beating this drum for a month.”
At that point, only Democratic Sen. John Fetterman had publicly signaled he would vote to keep the government open.
Fetterman insisted that he won’t succumb to the posturing he sees from party leaders after he urged Republicans to keep government open in the past when Democrats controlled the upper chamber.
“Never, ever, ever, ever, ever shut the government down,” Fetterman told reporters at the Capitol on Thursday afternoon. “Democrat, Republican, independents, anyone. Never shut the government down. That’s one of our core responsibilities.”
Fetterman called the political pressure “spicy” — telling reporters that he’s remaining “consistent” in his principled belief not to vote for a shutdown.
Fetterman acknowledged that Republicans “are daring” Democrats to shut down the government, but the freshman Democrat worried that furloughed workers and people depending on federal services are the ones who are “really going to hurt.”
Now that Republicans cleared their bill through the House, Fetterman said he believes the battle is over.
Fetterman said the only time Democrats have leverage is if the Republicans need the votes in the House.
“The GOP delivered, and that effectively iced this out. And that forces us to say, ‘Are you going to shut the government down, or you are going to vote for a flawed CR?’ And now for me, I refuse to shut the government down.”
Schumer on Wednesday said Senate Democrats would not provide the votes needed for Republicans to advance the House-approved deal to fund the government through September. Instead, Schumer proposed a one-month stopgap measure to allow more time for appropriators to negotiate and complete full-year funding bills.
Republicans and the White House, meanwhile, are preemptively pointing the finger at Democrats if a shutdown ensues.
“If it closes, it’s purely on the Democrats,” President Donald Trump said as he took reporter questions while meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office on Thursday.
Trump was asked whether he’s step in to negotiate with Democrats and he said he would if Republicans requested it: “If they need me, I’m there 100%.”
