Boston: A U.S. federal judge has handed Harvard University a sweeping legal victory, ruling that the Trump administration’s decision to cut billions in federal research funding was unlawful and rooted in political retaliation.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs, sitting in Boston, ordered the restoration of more than $2.2 billion in federal research grants that had been stripped from the university last year. In her ruling, she said the government’s move violated constitutional protections, civil rights laws, and the established procedures that guide the allocation of federal funds.
The case revolved around the Trump administration’s abrupt termination of Harvard’s long-standing research grants. Officials justified the decision by accusing the university of failing to adequately respond to antisemitism on campus. But Judge Burroughs determined that the measure was a thinly veiled attempt to punish the university for its perceived ideological stance and policy disagreements with the White House.
Her ruling emphasized that the funding decision was not made on neutral grounds, but rather out of hostility toward Harvard’s independence and resistance to federal demands. This, she concluded, amounted to a violation of the First Amendment, the Administrative Procedure Act, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
University leaders welcomed the ruling as a vindication of academic freedom and research integrity. They argued that the funds in question are not political favors but vital lifelines for scientific research, medical innovation, and technological development with global implications.
“This is more than a victory for Harvard,” one senior university official said. “It is a victory for every institution that relies on fair, apolitical access to research funding.”
The Trump administration, however, was quick to denounce the decision. In a statement, the White House described Judge Burroughs as an “activist” and insisted that Harvard should remain ineligible for future federal support. Officials indicated they would appeal the ruling, signaling that the confrontation between government power and academic institutions is far from over.
Beyond Harvard, the judgment is seen as a precedent-setting moment for U.S. higher education. Legal experts suggest the ruling could strengthen protections for universities against politically motivated interference in their funding streams. The case also highlights the delicate balance between government oversight and the autonomy of academic institutions in a polarized political climate.
With billions of dollars restored, Harvard now turns its attention back to its vast research agenda. But the ruling leaves lingering questions about whether future administrations may again attempt to wield financial power as a tool to shape campus policies and debates.