Since the first months of his second presidential term, US President Donald Trump has begun to implement one of his most prominent electoral promises for the year 2024, which is “Higher Education Reform” with a clear focus on the universities of the “ivy”.
While the confrontation seemed familiar between the Trump administration and those ancient institutions, this tour came more severe, as the administration resorted to direct pressure tools that included the threat to stop federal financing and open official investigations, in an attempt to pressure the targeted universities and push them to adhere to the administration’s directions and policies.
Association universities
The ivy association includes a gathering of 8 ancient private universities in the northeastern United States, known as its academic distinction and strict conditions for acceptance, along with its influential history in American political and social life.
The Association includes the universities of Brown, Colombia, Cornell, the College of Dthmouth, Harvard, Brentston, Pennsylvania and Yale University.
The origin of the name dates back to the thirties of the last century when this description was used during the sports tournaments between these universities, which were characterized by their buildings covered with ivy plants, before the name later turned into a synonym for academic influence and cultural symbolism.
It has always been believed that studying at the universities of the ivy association paves the way for the circles of power and influence, among its graduates are former presidents such as Barack Obama, George Bush Senior, son and Bill Clinton, and even current President Donald Trump, along with members of the US Senate and a number of federal officials with high positions.
Why the attack on the association?
Observers argue that the role that these institutions play are exaggerated and overlooks the extensive participation in the leadership paths from other educational institutions.
They see that the current campaign launched by the American administration against the prestigious education institutions in the country is a new link in a series of conflict that has extended for years related to the politicization of higher education and the role played by universities in forming American public opinion.
On the other hand, American conservatives believe that the League – which includes the most prestigious universities in the United States – has exceeded its academic role to turn into centers for broadcasting liberal ideas and making anti -political orientations.
Therefore, they do not consider stopping federal scholarships and other procedures as a political targeting, but rather a correction of a deviant path of academic neutrality.
Intellectual independence
The association’s universities defend their intellectual independence, stressing that their openness to political and social issues from multiple angles does not necessarily mean a bias, but rather an embodiment of its academic mission and a follow -up to pluralism.
In the same context, a study issued by the Manhattan Institute in October 2024 came to dispel the stereotype of the prestigious universities’ control of the preparation of American politicians.
The researcher, Andreik researcher, indicates that the US political leadership is not exclusive to prestigious university graduates, but rather comes from more diverse academic backgrounds.
The study showed – for example – that a percentage does not exceed 14% of the higher court judges in the states holding legal certificates from the universities of the “ivy association” compared to 45% who graduated in colleges of rights affiliated with major government universities.
Multiple front pressure
Since the beginning of the second term of President Donald Trump, the US administration has begun implementing what it described as “reformist steps” targeting the higher education sector, in an attempt to reset the relationship between universities and its academic community on new foundations.
The first of these steps came by issuing an executive order aimed at combating anti -Semitism, especially in educational institutions, and instructed federal agencies to review the civil and criminal authorities available to confront anti -Semitism, in addition to an analysis of all complaints and issues related to discrimination against Jews in universities since October 7, 2023.
According to the government’s vision in Washington, some universities – led by the “ivy association” institutions – turned a blind eye to the escalation of anti -Jews rhetoric through the protests in support of the Palestinians after the Israeli aggression against the Gaza Strip in October 2023.
As part of its broad campaign to reduce what it described as hate speech on the campus, the American administration began to exert escalating pressure on the ancient universities by threatening to stop federal funding as a way to pressure and influence.
Solidarity with Palestine
This trend emerged in the case of the University of Colombia, which turned into a center for protests at the beginning of the war on the Gaza Strip, to find the university itself threatened with a loss of about 400 million dollars of government financing as a punitive measure after being charged with failure to protect Jewish students.
The University of Colombia was not alone, but the procedures affected other universities within the association such as Pennsylvania, Brenston and Berron, as similar warnings related to combating anti -Semitism and reconsidering diversity, equality and inclusion programs were sent to it.
In conjunction with this, the federal authorities have opened investigations with students who participated in solidarity demonstrations with the Palestinian issue, most notably Mahmoud Khalil, graduate graduate, who was arrested and is currently facing the risk of deportation from the United States after the cancellation of his permanent residence.
Federal pressure was not limited to the threat to stop financing, but also expanded to one of the privileges that the targeted universities enjoyed, which is the privilege of tax exemptions.
Legal experts believe that the decision is a judicial precedent, and it may face a long path before it becomes implemented.
For its part, Harvard University confirmed in a statement that the threat is not based on a solid legal basis, stressing its commitment to the standards used in its financial management.
External financing
With the accumulation of legal, political and financial pressures, the US administration has reopened a file that was controversial related to foreign financing, as it accused a number of prestigious universities of not fully disclosing the grants and donations it receives from external parties.
The Ministry of Education has suggested that strict financial penalties impose on institutions that are not cooperating, and demanded that it provide accurate documents and data on foreign financing sources.
The Ministry indicated that Harvard University has provided “incomplete information” about donations, while other universities such as the University of California are currently undergoing similar federal investigations on its financing sources.
The campaign extended to affect foreign students through a series of procedures described by Washington officials as necessary to protect national security, which included the suspension of visas and expansion of digital monitoring.
According to Reuters, the US State Department on May 27th instructed its diplomatic missions abroad to stop the new dates for student visa applications, in conjunction with its willingness to expand the scope of electronic examination and activity on social media for foreign students.
The US President signed an advertisement suspending the entry of foreign students to the United States who seek to study or participate in the exchange programs at Harvard University for a period of 6 months, saying that the entry of citizens of some countries “harms American interests unless measures are taken”, and that the decision protects the country from security threats.
Harvard targeting
Harvard University is no longer just a prominent academic institution among universities in the United States, but rather – according to analysts – a symbol of the political and cultural conflict between the American administration and the conservative current on the one hand and higher education institutions on the other hand.
They believe that the fierce attack on the university goes beyond the limits of the dispute with an educational party, to become a political tool that fills the popular base of the movement “Make a great America again” (Mag), which brought Trump to power twice.
In the eyes of the movement, Harvard represents a model of an educational and cultural elite that opposes the President’s policies, and this trend believes that the current administration will not make real progress in its battle against elite universities without subjugating Harvard.
The university finds itself in the midst of legal battles and continuous investigations, as well as pressure that affects the essence of its academic independence, including those related to attempts to impose changes in its curricula.
At a time when other universities, such as Colombia, responded to some government demands in order to preserve federal financing, Harvard held a strict defense line.
In a public statement, the university president, Alan Garper, stressed that “Harvard will not give up its independence and constitutional rights,” stressing that the university “will not accept the federal government’s seizure of its academic decision, and will not be subject to conditions that exceed the legal authority of the current administration or any upcoming administration.”
Despite the explicit threat to the loss of financing that may reach billions of dollars, the university has made a clear position not to decline.
On the other hand, Trump called on the university to “improve behavior”, accusing it of “extreme lack of respect” towards the United States, saying, “All they do is get more and more involved.”
To support his vision on what he considers a founding failure in providing fair education opportunities, he announced from the White House that he is considering redistributing annual grants estimated at 3 billion dollars in favor of vocational and technical schools, stressing that “with this money we can finance the best commercial schools in the world”, and also called on universities to increase the acceptance of American students instead of foreigners.
Harvard’s position praises
Harvard’s position was praised by Obama, which he described as “a model for higher education institutions that reject illegal and unlawful attempts to suppress academic freedom.”
In previous statements, Obama expressed concern about targeting elite universities, criticizing calls for the names of students who exercise their right to expression.
For his part, independent Senator Bernie Sanders joined the voices defending the university, and wrote in a post on the “X” platform, praising “Harvard’s refusal to give up her constitutional rights before Trump’s tyranny,” calling on other universities to follow in defense of its academic independence.
