Harvard University and the Trump administration are embroiled in a high-stakes legal battle over a $2.6 billion freeze on federal research funding, with both sides vying for control over the outcome. The dispute began in April when Harvard filed a lawsuit, alleging that the funding cuts amount to an unconstitutional attempt to assert federal authority over academic institutions. The university argues that these cuts violate the First Amendment and Title VI protections, which are designed to safeguard against discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. Harvard’s legal team, led by attorney Steven Lehotsky, has framed the freeze as an illegal pressure campaign to compel the university into compliance with the administration’s policies, which they claim are unrelated to the university’s core mission of research and education.
The Trump administration, however, has taken a different stance, accusing Harvard of fostering antisemitism, violence, and coordination with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus. In the lawsuit, Harvard’s legal team emphasized that the administration’s demands lack a clear connection to the issues it is purportedly addressing. They argue that the funding agreement does not permit the government to impose unrelated demands as a condition for continued funding. The administration, represented by Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik, counters that the cuts are a matter of contract law and should be resolved in a different court. Velchik argued that the administration has