Federal Judge Rules Against Trump Administration, Restores Harvard’s Frozen Funding
Cambridge, MA — In a major legal decision on Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration’s freeze on Harvard University’s federal funding was unconstitutional, handing a significant victory to the prestigious institution. The ruling requires the immediate restoration of the nearly $9 billion in grants and contracts that had been suspended amid allegations related to Harvard’s handling of antisemitism on campus.
The case, which has drawn national attention for its implications on federal funding and academic freedom, began earlier this year when a federal task force initiated a review of Harvard’s funding. The government cited concerns over Harvard’s alleged failure to adequately address antisemitism, suspending and then terminating multiple grants across several federal agencies, including the Department of Commerce and the Health and Human Services Department.
On March 31, 2025, Harvard received official notification of the review and funding freeze. The administration linked the funding review to what it described as a dereliction of duties on Harvard’s part to curb antisemitic harassment. Public announcements simultaneously declared the start of this funding review, which put Harvard’s sizable federal support in jeopardy.
Harvard, along with other plaintiffs, challenged the freeze and termination of these funds, arguing that the administration’s actions were unlawful and lacked proper procedural justification. The plaintiffs contended the freeze violated statutory and constitutional protections by punishing the university without due process and by improperly categorizing campus incidents as violations warranting a cut in funding.
In the detailed ruling issued on September 3, 2025, the court found the administration’s freeze and termination of funding to be unconstitutional. The decision criticized the federal government for failing to follow the required legal procedures and for overstepping by attempting to punish Harvard based on unclear and unsubstantiated allegations. The ruling emphasized the importance of safeguarding institutions from arbitrary federal actions, especially regarding critical funding streams.
This ruling not only restores Harvard’s access to approximately $8.7 billion in federal funding but also sets an important precedent for how the federal government must engage with universities on matters tied to campus climate and federal grants. The judge underscored that concerns about campus issues, including antisemitism, must be addressed through appropriate channels without depriving institutions of their due rights.
Following the ruling, Harvard University representatives expressed relief and reiterated their commitment to combating antisemitism and fostering an inclusive environment. University officials stated that they would continue to cooperate with federal agencies in addressing these complex issues while defending their legal rights.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has announced plans to appeal the decision, indicating that the legal battle is likely to continue. The White House spokesperson stated that they remain committed to addressing antisemitism in higher education but will seek to defend the original funding freeze at the appellate level.
Legal experts view this case as a significant check on executive power, highlighting the limits of administrative actions that impact federal grant recipients. The ruling reinforces the notion that a transparent and evidence-based process is essential before punitive measures affecting funding can be implemented.
As the case progresses to potential appeals, both sides are poised to further clarify the balance between federal oversight, institutional autonomy, and protections against discrimination on college campuses. For now, Harvard’s substantial federal funding has been reinstated, providing financial stability for its research and educational missions going forward.