Introduction
Through a sweeping campaign of aggressive reform, the Trump Administration has sought to reshape the US federal government and target institutions which fail to align with the new order. In an unprecedented move, the administration has begun to punish some of the nation’s most prominent, elite universities–raising questions surrounding the nature of federal power as well as the future of academic freedom in American higher education.
DOGE: Trump’s Chainsaw Comes for Education
Foundational to the 2024 Trump administration’s policy agenda is the revival of the President’s 2016 campaign promise to “drain the swamp in Washington”–pledging a systematic deconstruction of federal bureaucracy and the administrative state. This sentiment is however, far from unique to the Trump Administration and harks back to a long conservative tradition in the belief in the superiority of a small government, deregulation and market efficiency. Although permeating and underscoring the vast majority of the current administration’s policies, the primary mechanism for accomplishing the all-out government overhaul promised to the Republican voter base has been the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) spearheaded by billionaire Tesla CEO, Elon Musk.
The formal announcement of DOGE took place days after the election in November 2024, signalling the utmost importance of the initiative to the incoming administration. Co-led by Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, Trump outlined that the agency would “operate outside the confines of government” to “dismantle bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies.” Practically, DOGE’s arrangement and authority was unprecedented and highly irregular. By keeping the roles informal, Trump bypassed the need for Senate approval, allowing DOGE to effectively function as a presidential commission with an executive mandate. This arrangement unsurprisingly has drawn widespread scepticism, with questions being raised surrounding DOGE’s legal authority as well as a lack of accountability.
In terms of key policies and impact, DOGE wasted little time in pursuing an aggressive set of radical, wide sweeping initiatives. Most notably, and a centrepiece of the DOGE agenda is the attempted destruction of the U.S Department of Education. Over the course of 2025, this goal has manifested itself in many ways, from significant cuts to the ED’s staff to severe funding reductions and budget reallocations. This move has been heavily criticised, with many state officials and educator groups stressing their dependency on sustained government support.
Harvard in Hot Water
Since March 2025, Trump has announced federal funding cuts for various schools such as Columbia University, Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania. For some research universities, these cuts amount to almost half of the university’s total revenue. Universities such as Columbia University have been accused of illegally pushing diversity, equity and inclusion without doing enough to combat antisemitism. In response, Columbia University yielded to the changes demanded by the Trump administration and restored $400 million in federal funding on March 22.
Harvard University likewise received a letter on April 11 claiming that receiving federal investment is unjustified for the university until they change their governance, hiring procedures and DEI programs. Harvard chose to retaliate, consequently losing over $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million worth of contracts on April 14. Trump fuelled this tension by threatening “Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status.” On the next day, the Department of Homeland Security demanded information on international students. If Harvard refused, it would be forced to forfeit their Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. In response, Harvard filed a lawsuit against Trump over the funding freeze, claiming it had already complied with the governments’ demands on students. Over the following week, a dispute developed between both parties, with the government cutting ties and demanding more student data while Harvard developed its lawsuit.
On May 22, the government retaliated against Harvard and terminated its SEVP certification, barring the school from enrolling 6800 international students. The school immediately sued the Trump administration, so U.S. District Judge Allison Dale Burroughs granted a temporary blocking order with a court hearing set for May 29.
For now, Harvard won the legal battle since the US court placed a blocking order on May 30, preserving Harvard’s ability to sponsor and host international students with an F-1 or a J-1 visa. However, the tension between the government and the school has had a detrimental impact on student sentiment, with several students considering dropping out. The lack of international students is expected to impact the economy of Massachusetts and damage the university’s ability to sponsor local students using the funding provided by international students.
Has America Shot Itself in the Foot?
Through the Trump administration’s punitive measures against Harvard, it becomes strikingly clear that these actions are politically motivated punishments rather than the legitimate enforcement of regulations. Strangling the flow of billions of federal dollars serves as a hindrance in various fields of research; sweeping visa restrictions have sown confusion among vulnerable international students; the continuing hostility of the administration has extended into areas outside traditional grants.
The administration’s animosity towards the elite institutions like Harvard carries profound long-term risks for innovation and higher education in America. For decades, the United States has taken the lead in academic research, attracting top talents from around the world. Through policies which threaten to drive these talents away, this superiority may soon fade. However, this issue is not new; during Trump’s first term, international student enrolment dropped approximately 12%—a decline primarily attributed to the restrictive nature of visa policies and the less welcoming climate for education. Experts fear that a worse downturn may occur in his current term. If this issue persists and worsens, American universities—and by extension, its industries—may no longer be the pipeline of talent they once were. Best put in the words of New America’s Kevin Carey, an “exodus of international students” may significantly harm universities nationwide “as well as American research and innovation itself.” By repelling the talents that make America the global hotspot for innovation, they risk losing their status as industry leaders in creating knowledge, progress and opportunity.
Beyond attracting top talents, the U.S. is also at risk of significant economic impact. In the 2023-2024 academic year, foreign students contributed an estimated $44 billion to the U.S. economy. Since most international students are ineligible for certain grants and government-subsidised scholarships, they are generally paying full price to attend some American colleges. Compounded by the imminent decrease in domestic college-aged populations, many U.S. colleges stand at the risk of massive revenue gaps and empty classrooms.
Lastly, the global perception of American education is at stake. The days when U.S. universities stood at the forefront of excellence, freedom of thought and meritocracy may soon dissipate. Actions like the Harvard crackdown stands testament to the self-destructive practices of the current administration. The U.S. government targeting their own top universities elucidates extremist protectionist policies that may stunt—rather than aid—America’s advancement at large. This loss of soft power brings with it noticeable reputational damage that could take years to repair.
Conclusion
Trump’s ongoing campaign against Harvard University poses a grave threat to the future of American higher education. In targeting Harvard’s federal funding and foreign students, Trump has sent a chilling warning to all universities: that pursuit of knowledge and globalisation can be punished if they conflict with his administration’s policies. The ideologically-driven punishment of these elite institutions undermines the very foundations on which U.S. academic and scientific leadership was built. What’s unfolding is not merely a dispute over policy, but a tragic turning point in the relationship between the federal government and the intellectual institutions it once empowered—and once committed to protect.
Image source: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-extends-order-blocking-trump-administration-revoking-harvards-ab-rcna209689
The CAINZ Digest is published by CAINZ, a student society affiliated with the Faculty of Business at the University of Melbourne. Opinions published are not necessarily those of the publishers, printers or editors. CAINZ and the University of Melbourne do not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of information contained in the publication.
