A war, of sorts, has broken out between the elite universities in the United States and the President of this country. Apparently, it seems unlikely that the stated issue - antisemitism - is the true reason for the dispute, notably between Harvard University, which has chosen to defy the Trump admistration rather than submit to the president's dramatic "overreach" including:

• Oversight and accountability for biased programs that fuel antisemitism. Programs and departments that fuel antisemitic harassment must be reviewed and necessary changes made to address bias, improve viewpoint diversity, and end ideological capture.
• Disciplinary reform and consistent accountability. Harvard has an obligation to consistently and proactively enforce its existing disciplinary policies, ensuring that senior administrative leaders are responsible for final decisions. Reforms must include a omprehensive mask ban (with medical and religious exemptions, given identification is lways displayed) and a clarified time, place, and manner policy. Harvard must review and eport on disciplinary actions for antisemitic rule violations since October 7, 2023.
• Student group accountability. Recognized and unrecognized student groups, and their leadership, must be held accountable for violations of Harvard policy.
• Governance and leadership reforms. Harvard must make meaningful governance reforms to improve its organizational structure to foster clear lines of authority and accountability, and to empower faculty and administrative leaders who are committed to implementing the changes indicated in this letter.
• Merit-based admissions reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based admissions policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, or national origin in admissions throughout its undergraduate, graduate, and other programs; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
• Merit-based hiring reform. Harvard must adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies; cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in hiring throughout its teaching and research faculty, staff, and leadership; and demonstrate through structural and personnel action that these changes are durable.
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. DEI programs teach students, faculty, staff, and leadership to make snap judgments about each other based on crude race and identity stereotypes, which fuels division and hatred based on race, color, national origin, and other protected identity characteristics. All efforts should be made to shutter such programs.
• Cooperation with law enforcement. Harvard must cooperate with law enforcement to ensure student safety.
• Transparency and reporting to ED, DHS, and other federal regulators. Harvard must comply fully with existing statutory reporting requirements under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, commit to full cooperation with DHS and other federal regulators, and make organizational changes as necessary to enable full compliance.

It is quite obvious, at least to Harvard (but not to, say Columbia University) that the courts were a far more respectful, ethical, congruous, and rational response to the proposed threat of billions of dollars of lost grants and other revenue than acceding to what it termed the outrageous interference and overreach of this irrational president. And unlike other Ivy League Universities issued similar demands, simply refused.

As expected, an enraged president, who in his first 100 days in office has been described as "drunk with power & authority," even with diminishing results and diminishing support, lashed out with immediate cuts and blocks of funding. Harvard, then, immediately filed suit in various courts to stop him, which further resulted in his recommendation that the IRS suspend their tax-exempt status, which Harvard - an observing legal commentator noted - "took the gloves off" and filed another suit in federal court.

The absurdity of the president's actions, however, seems foolhardy by one specific fact alone that makes his entire "oneupsmanship" more ignorant that most: Harvard University is a pioneer and vanguard of medical and scientific research in the US and if the world, hands down, bar none. In fact, in the past 50 years, Harvard has produced the single most Nobel Prize laureats, 32 to be exact, than any other university in the world. The University of California system collectively - meaning UC Berkley, UCLA, & San Diego - have produced 28; Stanford has produced 20; Columbia has produced 11; Oxford & Cambridge have produced 18 each respectively; while Karolinska (Sweden) and Heidelberg (Germany) and Tokyo have had 5 each respectively. Disabling Harvard Medical School would be extremely foolish for this country and for the world, and only an arrogant, self-serving politician would embark upon such an foolish task to prove a political point.

Unfortunately, we can only think of a single politician foolish enough to do it, and we can only hope that his party exercise the courage to stop him

NOTE: Update, July 6, 2025 - After weeks of claiming negotiations were very positive between the University and the Trump Administration, the Trump Administration made public a letter delivered to Harvard's Administration declaring their failure to properly protect Jewish students from antisemetic attacks. The president demanded the University immediately submit to its original list of demands or suffer deeper cuts in federal funds, including funding to support The Nurses's Health Study, which has provided data regarding 300,000 woman and 50,000 men for nearly 50 years, and resulted in 20,000 published research studies ¹:

The university has filed a lawsuit in Boston federal court against the administration, saying it “will not surrender its independence or its constitutional rights.” “The Government has not — and cannot — identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation,” the lawsuit said.