{shortcode-0673c1acd6f70c5a770df4c4599c80a6bfb13076}

President Donald Trump’s demands, explicitly addressed to Harvard’s top brass, reveal what we already knew — it was never about antisemitism.

Last week, the Trump administration told Harvard what it needs to do to keep its federal funding. It’s as bad as we thought, and it’s time for Harvard to stand up for its students, faculty, and values.

The administration’s demands include the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion programming and the institution of “merit-based admissions,” as if Harvard’s current system — post-lawsuit — was somehow anything different. The purported motive? To “protect American students and faculty from antisemitic violence and harassment.”

What does DEI have to do with antisemitism? Since when did kidnapping students off the street protect our Jewish community? We’ve said it before, and it is now clearer than ever: This attack on higher education was never about protecting Jewish students.

The administration’s demands are vague and seemingly purposefully so. While the Trump administration’s letter to Harvard calls for the University to end all DEI programming, it makes no effort to define what falls under the DEI umbrella. The same can be said for the letter’s call to review “programs and departments that fuel antisemitic harassment” — none such are mentioned, leaving the University in the unenviable decision of guessing at Trump’s intentions.

The letter isn’t even internally consistent — it demands improved “viewpoint diversity” at Harvard while also being categorically against admissions and hiring initiatives Harvard has instituted to accomplish that very feat.

Even if it were possible to simultaneously comply with these contradictory demands, Harvard has received no public assurance that its funding will be returned. The only outstanding example doesn’t offer much hope for our institution: Columbia University gave in last month, and it still doesn’t have its funding back.

On the other hand, if Harvard complies, Trump has every reason to keep up his attack. He would have the ability to wield the threat of federal funding, ordering the University to pay fealty and satisfy increasingly ludicrous demands or risk a budget slash. Vague demands provide Trump a pretext to call on Harvard to do whatever he wants, all under the banner of fulfilling obligations to the letter.

The administration’s actions further exhibit a disturbing plot to leave a lasting, tyrannical impression on Harvard’s culture and structure. The letter requires Harvard to “improve its organizational structure to foster clear lines of authority and accountability” and “empower faculty and administrative leaders who are committed to implementing the changes indicated in this letter.”

In other words, the Trump administration wants to install pro-Trump leaders at Harvard, at the expense of academic freedom, free speech, and Harvard’s core values. The University cannot afford to give in.

The demands are not only unclear and authoritarian — some of them are based on falsehood. For example, the letter requires Harvard to “adopt and implement merit-based admissions policies” and “cease all preferences based on race, color, or national origin in admissions.” But the Supreme Court already struck down race-based affirmative action, and Harvard complied with the ruling. The University’s admissions are already merit based.

The presence of such language makes clear the letter is not intended to offer a serious path of reform for Harvard. Put simply, the letter doesn't seem to be addressed to Harvard at all — it’s a political statement. How can the University prove it has complied with demands based on false pretenses?

We’ve all said it — from our opinion pages, Harvard professors, and a former Harvard president to the Cambridge City Council. It’s time for Harvard to act.

Instead of complying, Harvard should work with other universities to push back, leading the fight against the Trump administration’s relentless attacks on higher education.

The time for action isn’t now — it was last week. It is time for Harvard to redeem itself.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Have a suggestion, question, or concern for The Crimson Editorial Board? Click here.