Unlock the White House Watch watch newsletter for free
Your guide on what the US elections of 2024 mean for Washington and Le Monde
Donald Trump’s administration launched an examination in measures to combat alleged anti -Semitism at Harvard University, which could freeze up to $ 9 billion in federal funding for the institution.
The departments of education, health and social services and general services on Monday said They had started “a complete examination of federal contracts and subsidies at Harvard University and its affiliates” as part of their joint working group to combat anti -Semitism.
Linda McMahon, Secretary of Education, said in a statement: “Harvard’s inability to protect students from campus against anti -Semitic Discrimination – while promoting division ideologies in relation to a free survey – has endangered seriously. »»
She added that the government “would collaborate with the relevant procurement agencies to assess whether the working orders should be issued”. The press release indicates that the examination would cover $ 256 million in contracts and $ 8.7 billion in multi -year subsidy commitments “to ensure that the university is in accordance with federal regulations, including its responsibilities in terms of civil rights”.
Trump and the Republican Party have launched a series of attacks on higher education, with accusations of “awake” ideology and threats of wider measures, including surveys on anti -Semitism and potential taxes on university endowments.
This Monday decision comes despite the recent preventive movements of Harvard to avoid measures. The university has created a working group on anti -Semitism, recently set up a trial By students alleging anti-Semitism on the campus, rejected the heads of the faculty of its Center for Studies in the Middle East and canceled a partnership with Birzeit University in the West Bank.
He also undertook to publish an annual report on his progress in response to discrimination or harassment. But he always faces a legal action and a probe by the federal government.
Kirsten Weld, head of the recently established university chapter of the American Association of University Professors, described the last decision of the government “insane destructive” and said: “This is an attack on the entire sector, civil society and democratic culture in the United States.”
“We have now seen the Trump administration’s strategy is to remove individual institutions one by one,” she said. “They will not stop. The only way to follow is that the institutions coordinate and work together in the sector to develop a united front and a joint strategy to postpone these attacks. ”
The last escalation against elite higher education institutions follows the withdrawal earlier in March from $ 400 million in federal subsidies At the University of Columbia, which made a series of concessions following requests for changes in governance and discipline against demonstrators.
The actions of Columbia, which led to the resignation last week of its second president since 2023, have not yet led to the subsidy.
The government has also frozen $ 175 million in funding at the University of Pennsylvania, which would have linked transgender athletes to participate in female sports in accordance with the guidelines in place at the time.
Sean Keveney, an acting general lawyer for health and social services, said on Monday: “The working group will continue its efforts to eliminate anti -Semitism and to refocus our higher education institutions on the fundamental values which undergo liberal education.”
Harvard has an endowment worth more than $ 50 billion, which, according to civil servants, is assigned to specific expenses, including financial assistance. Earlier this month, he announced an expansion of support that would allow first cycle education to be free for students from families with annual income of $ 100,000 or less.
Several dozen Harvard law teachers have spoken in a letter To students last week against the “serious challenges to the rule of law” posed by the actions of the Trump administration against law firms and to punish people “for having legally spoken of questions of public concern”.
Harvard was approached for comments.
