Condemning antisemitism on campus is nonnegotiable. But what’s happening at Harvard right now is about much more than confronting hate — it’s about whether our universities are for sale to the highest political bidder.
The Trump administration has dangled a $500 million settlement to end its feud with Harvard, but the fine print would reshape how the university operates — from what gets taught, to who oversees faculty, to how students are policed. If Harvard takes this deal without ironclad safeguards, it’s not just selling out its students and professors. It’s setting a precedent: that a White House can use funding as a weapon to force ideological compliance.
We’ve already seen the playbook. Columbia University paid $200 million to make investigations disappear — and in return, accepted an independent monitor reporting directly to the administration, plus sweeping changes to campus governance. As one analysis warned, “academic freedom is severely threatened with a provost hanging over Middle Eastern studies and another monitor constantly reporting back to Trump.”
Translation: the chilling effect will last far longer than the headlines.
Brown University fought for — and won — a better outcome. Its $50 million settlement came with guarantees that the administration wouldn’t “dictate Brown’s curriculum or the content of academic speech” and no intrusive oversight. Harvard’s lawyers are pushing for similar protections, but with 10 times more money on the line, the political pressure is far greater.
More than a dozen Democratic members in Congress who attended Harvard cautioned against a settlement on Aug. 1st, warning the university it may warrant “rigorous Congressional oversight and inquiry.”
In a statement, Congressman Sam Liccardo says, “We urge Harvard to defend its institutional independence and academic integrity from this blatant attempt at political intimidation.” And Congressman Dr. Raul Ruiz notes, “Harvard must stand firm in defending academic freedom and institutional independence. This is a test of values—and the University has a chance to lead by example.”
If Harvard capitulates under financial and political duress, future presidents — Republican or Democratic — will know they can bypass the courts and instead wield federal funding as a blunt instrument to reshape campus life. That path does not just punish one school; it chills scholarship and discourse nationwide.
The truth is, research dollars can be recouped in time. But once universities signal they can be coerced into political compliance, reputations, credibility and intellectual freedom are far harder to restore.
Harvard is right to be wary. The settlement it accepts now will not only define this chapter of its history, but it will also set the terms for how — and whether — higher education in America can resist political retaliation in the decades to come.
Lindsey Granger is a News Nation contributor and co-host of The Hill’s commentary show “Rising.” This column is an edited transcription of her on-air commentary.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
Comments