In a major escalation of its ongoing dispute with Harvard University, the Trump administration has accused the Ivy League institution of violating federal civil rights law by failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students from harassment and discrimination. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the findings Monday following an investigation by its Office for Civil Rights (OCR), concluding that Harvard is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The OCR report claims that Harvard became a “willful participant in anti-Semitic harassment” and failed to adequately respond to a campus climate that left Jewish students feeling unsafe, marginalized, and unprotected. The administration has warned that if the university does not implement corrective action immediately, it could face the loss of all federal financial assistance.
Stark Accusations and Graphic Evidence
In a letter to Harvard President Alan Garber, the OCR described a troubling environment on campus. According to the findings, Jewish and Israeli students reported facing physical and verbal assaults, including being spat on and targeted with slurs. In some instances, they felt compelled to hide their Jewish identity. Visual hate symbols—including an image showing a dollar sign inside a Star of David and Israeli flags defaced with swastikas—were circulated and posted around campus.
The letter further accuses Harvard of failing to enforce its own conduct policies during a series of anti-Israel protests and encampments, where demonstrators allegedly called for genocide, disrupted campus life, and blocked Jewish students from accessing public spaces. Although some students involved in the protests were charged with conduct violations, the report states that punishments were inconsistent and largely inconsequential.
“Harvard’s failure to act decisively has enabled a hostile environment to persist,” the OCR wrote. “By the end of the process, only a fraction of offending students received discipline—and none were suspended.”
Administration Raises Stakes
This finding comes amid an already fraught relationship between Harvard and the Trump administration. The university is currently suing the federal government over what it calls unconstitutional mandates to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and require ideological rebalancing in faculty hiring.
In its latest move, the administration has taken a hard line: “Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges, and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again,” the letter states. The administration has already enacted funding cuts and banned Harvard from enrolling new foreign students as part of its crackdown.
The government asserts that Harvard’s institutional philosophy has fueled the problem: “Harvard’s commitment to racial hierarchies—where individuals are sorted and judged according to their membership in an oppressed group identity and not individual merit—has enabled anti-Semitism to fester.”
Harvard Responds: Disagreement but Pledges Action
In a statement to National Review, a Harvard spokeswoman pushed back on the administration’s conclusions. She cited the university’s recent efforts to combat anti-Semitism, including a detailed internal report on bias and new training programs. “Harvard has made significant strides to combat bigotry, hate, and bias,” the statement said. “We strongly disagree with the government’s findings.”
The university claims it has taken steps to clarify anti-bullying policies, review student discipline processes, and promote civil discourse. “We remain committed to ensuring members of our Jewish and Israeli community are embraced, respected, and can thrive at Harvard,” the spokeswoman added.
Broader Implications
Legal analysts note that the OCR’s finding could have sweeping implications for higher education institutions nationwide, particularly as federal agencies adopt a more aggressive stance on campus speech and discrimination. Title VI prohibits institutions receiving federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin—but its application to religious and political identity, particularly in the context of rising tensions over Israel and Palestine, has become increasingly contentious.
The administration’s threat to revoke federal funding—a drastic but legally permissible step—puts Harvard in a difficult position. Federal funding accounts for hundreds of millions of dollars annually in research grants, student aid, and institutional support.
As of now, Harvard has not indicated whether it will comply with the administration’s demands or seek to challenge the decision in court. What is clear is that the battle between one of the nation’s most prestigious universities and the federal government is far from over—and may set a new precedent in the debate over free speech, identity politics, and civil rights on American campuses.
