Staff Reports
Barack Obama recently took a swing at the Trump administration, praising Harvard University for its defiant stance against the president’s requests for change. The former commander-in-chief believes that Harvard is leading the way in a higher education rebellion, choosing to ignore federal funding threats—like losing $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts—rather than bowing to what he calls dictatorial demands. How noble!
After the administration pushed Harvard to clean up its act—asking for an end to antisemitism, merit-based hiring practices, and a dismissal of undue diversity initiatives—the university simply decided it would rather leave the donations at the door and carry on with business as usual. In a world where sticking one’s head in the sand while clutching a pile of cash seems to be a trendy move, Harvard managed to establish itself as the poster child of academic obstinacy.
On social media, Obama credited Harvard with setting an example for other educational institutions: a shining beacon of refusal. He lauded the university for standing up against what he called “unlawful and ham-handed attempts” to curb academic freedom. So, in Obama’s eyes, teaching students to ignore real-world problems, all while raking in taxpayer money, is the pinnacle of intellectual integrity. It’s refreshing to see how he champions the modern-day noble struggle against the evil forces of governmental accountability.
Obama says Harvard 'set an example' for how colleges should reject Trump's demands https://t.co/enT3m9XAmz
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) April 15, 2025
At the helm of this rebellion is Harvard President Alan Garber, who, rather than considering a genuine response to the administration’s concerns, opted to dig in his heels like a toddler at a grocery store checkout. In a world filled with issues, Harvard seems set on prioritizing its preferred methods over merit and historical accountability. Of course, there’s nothing like a little academic elitism to keep people guessing about what constitutes “academic integrity.”
While Trump’s demands may not have struck a harmonious chord with Ivy League stalwarts, the ensuing backlash leaves one question looming: what will happen to those federal funds they just threw to the wind? It remains unclear how Harvard plans on reining in its spending once the money tap gets turned off. But one thing is sure: as long as there’s an opportunity to be audacious while basking in the warmth of progressive ideals, the Ivy League will remain ever so committed to its lofty reasoning. It seems a reality check for Harvard could be the ultimate lesson in about five billion dollars’ worth of real-world consequences.
