Court Ruling on Harvard's Federal Funding

On September 3rd 2025, a federal judge delivered a landmark ruling that the Trump's administration's decision to withhold billions in federal research funding from Harvard University was unlawful.

In April 2025, the administration moved to freeze $2.2bn in grants to Harvard University, citing alleged failures in addressing antisemitism and broader campus governance concerns. These grants had supported many of the university's programs, including financial aid and research funding. Harvard filed suit, arguing that the action was politically motivated and violated its First Amendments.

Judge Allison Burroughs of the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts ruled in Harvard's favour stating that, while Harvard had tolerated hateful behaviour for too long, the Trump administration "used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country's premier universities". She also mentioned how the suspension of funds breached the Administrative Procedure Act, since the government failed to follow lawful procedures and relied on pretextual justifications. She barred the administration from terminating or freezing any additional federal funding to Harvard and blocked it from continuing to withhold payment on existing grants or refusing to award new funding to the school in the future.

Reactions

The Harvard President Alan Gerber welcomed the ruling as a reaffirmation of academic independence, while pledging to fight against antisemitism. He said, no government ''should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue".

White House Officials have indicated plans to appeal, as White House spokesperson Liz Huston in a statement vowed to appeal the ruling by an activist Obama-appointed judges. She said that Harvard "does not have a constitutional right to taxpayers dollars and remain ineligible for grants in the future.

What does this mean for students?

• Research opportunities stay alive: the restored research funding means labs and research centres at Harvard can continue operating

• Financial Aid and Campus Service remain stable: potential knock-on effects have been cancelled as a result.

• Signal to Other Universities: universities can legally resist federal overreach,

  
  

The ruling is widely viewed as a test case for the future of academic freedom in the United States. It underscores the tension between federal authority and university self-governance at a time of heightened political polarisation.