President Donald Trump’s administration has launched a new investigation into Harvard University. This time, we targeted exchange programs that allowed foreign scholars to visit elite schools.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement Wednesday stating that the investigation is necessary to ensure the safety of the United States, but the investigation could be viewed by critics as the latest attempt to bully schools to comply with President Donald Trump’s policies.
“Americans have the right to expect universities to maintain national security, comply with the law and provide a safe environment for all students,” Rubio wrote in a statement.
“The investigation ensures that the Department of State programs are not in conflict with our country’s interests.”
Attacking the crisis is Harvard’s Exchange Visitor program, which allows professors, students and researchers to come to the United States temporarily.
Participating scholars will receive a J-1 visa. This will allow you to participate in cultural and academic exchange programs based on your coming to the United States as visitors rather than as immigrants.
However, Harvard’s ability to host such programs is subject to State Department approval. Rubio suggested that the school’s “continued eligibility as a sponsor” would stick to the balance of Wednesday’s investigation.
“To maintain the privilege of exchange visitor sponsorship, sponsors must comply with all regulations, including implementing programs in a way that undermines foreign policy objectives or does not compromise US national security interests,” Rubio wrote.
National Security Questions
Under President Trump’s second term, the United States repeatedly cited issues of national security and foreign policy in its attempts to expel Palestinians, particularly those involved in anti-war movements.
Rubio himself is based on the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (a relatively vague Cold War era law) in his efforts to deport student protest leaders like Mahmoud Khalil.
The law allows the Secretary of State to expel foreigners whose existence or activity could potentially cause a “impact of a foreign policy that is potentially serious and disadvantageous to the United States.”
However, the government’s use of such laws is currently being challenged in court. Critics have argued that it violates the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and protest.
President Trump’s opposition to Palestinian protests led him to engage in a prominent conflict with Harvard University, the oldest university in the country and a highly deceased member of the Ivy League.
Schools like Harvard University in Massachusetts and Columbia University in New York were considered epicenter of protests. In Colombia, for example, students built tent camps that influenced similar demonstrations around the world.
However, school crackdowns against these protests were also emulated on other campuses. Colombia, for example, called on police to clear Palestinian demonstrators, and other schools took similar action, leading to more than 3,000 campus arrests nationwide last year.
Critics of the protests, including President Trump, called the demonstrations anti-Semitism and warned them that they would create a dangerous learning environment for Jewish students.
But protest leaders point out that most of the demonstrations were peaceful and forced rejection of anti-Semite hatred. Rather, they argue that their protests are about shedding light on the abuses Israel committed in Gaza.
Pressure on schools
However, when he took office in January, Trump promised to take “strong and unprecedented measures” to eradicate allegations of anti-Semitism on campus.
In early March, he began broadside on Ivy League campuses such as Columbia and Harvard. He stripped Colombia of $400 million in federal contracts and grants, then began by requiring compliance with the list of requests, including disciplinary reform and external oversight of certain academic departments.
By March 22nd, Colombia had agreed to make concessions.
But Trump encountered greater resistance at Harvard University. On April 11, the Trump administration similarly issued a list of requests that Harvard University must commit to “structural and human resource changes” in order to promote “diversity of perspectives,” eliminate diversity programs, and agree to external audits.
I refused that. Instead, Harvard President Alan Gerber said such demands would violate Harvard’s rights as a private institution committed to academic freedom.
Since then, the Trump administration has ruled out Harvard’s billions of dollars of deprivation of federal contracts, research funds and grants. Federal courts in Boston began hearing legal challenges to the decision this week.
Multiple Attacks
However, the Trump administration has also explored other paths to pressure Harvard University on compliance.
Trump threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-free status – critics warned that it was illegal to do so, but Christa Noem blocked Harvard’s University from accessing the Student and Exchange Visitors Program (SEVP).
Foreign students make up about a quarter of Harvard students. Losing access to the SEVP system effectively meant that these students were unable to attend school.
Harvard University has received a preliminary injunction that challenges the Trump administration’s ban on foreign students in court and allows international students to stay while they file a lawsuit.
However, other hurdles have since emerged. For example, earlier this month, the Trump administration denounced Harvard for civil rights violations and called for a review of accreditation, an industry-wide quality standard that gives value to university diplomas.
Meanwhile, news outlets report that Trump administration and Harvard officials are continuing to negotiate whether the deal will be struck to alleviate ongoing tensions.
