Lead: On Sept. 3, 2025 in Boston, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs found that the Trump administration unlawfully terminated roughly $2.2 billion in federal research grants to Harvard University and ordered that the government may not cut or withhold additional funding while the case proceeds.
Key Takeaways
- A federal judge ruled the administration’s grant cancellations unlawful and retaliatory.
- The decision protects about $2.2 billion in Harvard research funding from further cuts.
- Judge Allison Burroughs said antisemitism was used as a pretext for an ideologically driven campaign.
- The ruling bars the government from freezing, terminating, or refusing to pay grants to Harvard going forward.
- The White House said it will appeal and maintained Harvard lacks a constitutional right to federal funds.
- Harvard has been engaged in settlement talks; former demands by the president included asking for $500 million from the university.
- Other Ivy League schools, including Columbia, reached settlements—Columbia agreed to a $220 million resolution in July.
Verified Facts
Judge Allison Burroughs, an appointee of President Barack Obama, issued the ruling in Boston on Sept. 3, 2025. Her order found the administration’s actions violated Harvard’s First Amendment free-speech rights and did not follow required legal procedures for terminating federal grants.
The court’s injunction prevents the administration from terminating or freezing additional federal funding to Harvard, from withholding payments on existing grants, and from refusing to award new grants to the university while the litigation continues.
The administration had canceled hundreds of grants to Harvard researchers citing the university’s response to antisemitic harassment following the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack and ensuing campus protests tied to the Gaza war. Harvard disputed that rationale and sued, saying the moves were retaliation tied to demands to change governance, hiring, and academic programs.
Harvard President Alan Garber said the ruling affirms the university’s academic freedom and protection for ongoing scientific work. The university is participating in settlement talks with the administration; President Trump publicly said he wanted Harvard to pay “nothing less than $500 million,” a demand reported during White House meetings.
Context & Impact
The decision comes amid a broader White House campaign to condition federal research funding on institutional responses to campus protests and alleged bias. Burroughs characterized the campaign as an ideologically motivated effort that used concerns about antisemitism as a pretext.
Practical effects of the court order include restoring financial predictability for affected research projects and protecting payments to faculty and staff funded by federal grants. The injunction also preserves Harvard’s ability to accept future federal awards while litigation is unresolved.
Separately, the administration has pursued other measures against Harvard, including moves to restrict international student visas and question accreditation. In a different case, Burroughs previously barred the administration from stopping Harvard from hosting international students; international students make up about one-quarter of Harvard’s student body.
Columbia University and other Ivy League institutions reached settlements with the administration over related allegations; Columbia agreed in July to a $220 million settlement to restore denied research funding.
Implications for Universities and Research
- Universities may have stronger legal protection against ideologically driven funding withdrawals.
- Federal agencies will face scrutiny on procedural compliance when modifying or terminating grants.
- Ongoing litigation may shape how campus protests and alleged civil-rights violations are factored into funding decisions.
Official Statements
“We will appeal this ruling,” said White House spokesperson Liz Huston, calling the judge an “activist Obama-appointed judge” and asserting that Harvard “does not have a constitutional right to taxpayer dollars.”
White House statement
Harvard President Alan Garber said the decision “validates our arguments in defense of the University’s academic freedom and critical scientific research.”
Harvard University
Explainer: Legal Basis
Unconfirmed
- Whether settlement talks will produce a final agreement and, if so, what financial terms Harvard might accept remains unresolved.
- The administration’s future strategies for other universities named in its campaign are uncertain until appeals and related cases proceed.
Bottom Line
The ruling is a significant legal win for Harvard that temporarily halts the administration’s funding-related pressure campaign and reinforces court protection for academic freedom and grant-process safeguards. Expect an appeal and continued negotiations or litigation that will determine long-term outcomes for federal-university relations.