平权行动结束后，哈佛大学就招生问题展开调查
【中美创新时报2025 年 5 月 16 日编译讯】（记者温友平编译）特朗普政府本周对哈佛大学发起了新的攻击，披露正在调查这所剑桥大学的招生政策是否违反了最高法院终止平权行动的裁决。《波士顿环球报》记者尼克·斯托伊科和托尼亚·阿拉内兹对此作了下述报道。
《纽约时报》周四报道称，美国司法部已在一封信中通知哈佛大学有关调查的消息，并称该调查是根据《虚假申报法》展开的，该法旨在惩罚欺骗政府的人。
美国司法部对《波士顿环球报》表示“不予置评”，《波士顿环球报》也要求其提供这封信的副本。
哈佛大学发言人杰森·牛顿在给《波士顿环球报》的一份声明中表示，该大学将“继续捍卫其核心的、受法律保护的原则，防止联邦政府进行毫无根据的报复”。
牛顿说：“这项调查是政府针对哈佛大学发起的又一次滥用和报复行动，是众多行动中的最新一次。”他指出，特朗普政府此前已经取消或威胁削减数十亿美元的资金，包括用于医疗和科学研究的资金，“这将对我们国家的健康、经济繁荣和科学领导力造成毁灭性后果。”
据《纽约时报》援引联邦教育部另一封信函报道，本月早些时候，该部门还通知哈佛大学，该校的招生政策正在接受合规审查，以确定是否存在对本科申请者的种族歧视。
教育部发言人玛蒂·比德曼（Madi Biedermann）在给《波士顿环球报》的一份声明中表示，对哈佛大学的合规性审查“早就应该进行了”。她还提到了教育部上个月宣布的一项调查，该调查针对《哈佛法律评论》在会员资格和文章选择政策方面存在种族歧视的指控，以及她所说的“大学在招聘实践中明显针对种族和性别”。
比德曼说：“这些公开的失败表明，迫切需要对哈佛大学的记录进行彻底审查。”
2023年，最高法院就针对哈佛大学和北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的诉讼案作出裁决，终止了大学招生中基于种族的平权措施。这项裁决推翻了近半个世纪的先例，剥夺了精英大学领导者认为对校园多元化至关重要的一项工具。
这项裁决对大学招生产生了迅速影响，哈佛大学报告称，去年秋季黑人新生入学人数有所下降。阿默斯特学院、麻省理工学院、塔夫茨大学和布朗大学也报告称，2024年秋季入学的黑人新生比例与前一年相比有所下降。
发起针对哈佛大学招生政策诉讼的“公平录取学生组织”主席爱德华·布鲁姆表示，他将鼓励司法部“调查哈佛大学以及我国所有竞争性大学的招生实践”。
“许多高等教育机构很可能在招生政策中使用种族歧视因素，”他在周四的短信中说道。“司法部和教育部应该收集和分析申请及录取数据，以确保所有学校都遵守最高法院推翻种族歧视的裁决。”
哈佛大学发言人牛顿表示，负责审核申请的工作人员无法获取申请人自报的种族和族裔数据，招生办公室在招生周期结束前不会考虑或审查申请班级的种族和族裔构成。班级人口统计数据仅在新学年开始后公布。
牛顿表示，最高法院裁决后，哈佛大学立即修改了招生政策，并更新了负责审阅申请的招生团队成员的培训材料。他还表示，在当地社区面试哈佛申请者的校友志愿者已被指示不要询问或考虑申请者的种族。
牛顿说，论文题目也进行了修改，不再询问身份问题，而是询问申请者如何看待自己将为哈佛学术界做出贡献。
华盛顿特区无党派智库“教育改革现在”的高等教育政策主任詹姆斯·S·墨菲称，司法部调查哈佛大学的新举措“非同寻常”，并表示针对高等教育机构的此类指控通常会由教育部民权办公室进行调查。
“但特朗普政府其实对查明真相或得到真正的答案并不感兴趣，”他说。“这是一场政治迫害。”
他补充道：“没有理由认为这是对侵犯公民权利的善意调查。”
1989 届校友、哈佛多元化联盟联合创始人兼董事会成员克里斯汀·佩纳 (Kristin Penner) 在谈到司法部的最新行动时表示，“这是长期以来试图质疑黑人和其他在哈佛等领域代表性不足的人的资格的行为，而不是拆除阻碍高等教育各个方面平等机会的结构性种族主义障碍。”
据《纽约时报》发布的请求副本显示，美国司法部致哈佛大学的有关《虚假申报法》调查的信函并未详细说明哈佛大学可能如何欺骗政府，而是要求哈佛大学在未来三周内提供大量文件并对详细问题提供书面答复。
政府还在寻求哈佛大学官员发送短信、电子邮件或其他通讯方式，讨论特朗普总统今年早些时候发布的旨在根除多元化、公平和包容性计划的行政命令。
司法部还要求哈佛大学在 30 天内确定一名学校官员，就其招生政策进行宣誓作证，并说明这些政策在 2023 年最高法院裁决后可能发生的变化。
作为美国历史最悠久、最富有的大学，哈佛大学正与特朗普政府展开激烈斗争。特朗普政府正利用法律威胁和削减经费，迫使学校屈服于特朗普的世界观和议程。校方指责哈佛大学营造了一种僵化的左翼学术氛围，不容忍保守派观点，为猖獗的反犹太主义提供了滋生地，迫使许多犹太学生生活在恐惧之中。
自美国国立卫生研究院一个多月前冻结了对哈佛大学 22 亿美元的研究经费和合同以来，特朗普政府的施压范围已扩大到来自多个机构的一系列令人眼花缭乱的威胁。
哈佛大学于 4 月 21 日提起诉讼，指控政府采取过度干涉和非法手段，以阻止资金冻结。
自此以后，制裁仍在继续。
美国国土安全部威胁要阻止国际学生入学，教育部指责该大学未能报告大额外国捐款，特朗普威胁要取消该校的免税地位，这只是针对这所常春藤盟校的一系列行动中的一小部分。
周二，八个联邦机构又削减了哈佛大学4.5亿美元的研究经费。联邦反犹太主义特别工作组在一封告知哈佛大学新一轮削减的信中表示，该大学是自由主义、美德标榜和歧视的“滋生地”，要想重拾其在学术界的地位，还有很长的路要走。
《波士顿环球报》员工迈克·达米亚诺（Mike Damiano）对本报告亦有贡献。本报告内容来自《波士顿环球报》通讯社。
题图：哈佛园入口处的大门John Tlumacki/Globe Staff
附原英文报道：
Harvard investigated over admissions after end of affirmative action
By Nick Stoico and Tonya Alanez Globe Staff,Updated May 15, 2025, 8:44 p.m.
A gate at the entrance to Harvard Yard John Tlumacki/Globe Staff
The Trump administration opened a new line of attack against Harvard University this week, disclosing that it is investigating whether the Cambridge school’s admissions policies violate the Supreme Court‘s ruling that ended affirmative action.
The Department of Justice notified Harvard of the investigation in a letter, The New York Times reported Thursday, saying the inquiry was opened under the False Claims Act, which is a law designed to punish those who defraud the government.
The Justice Department said it had “no comment” to the Globe, which also requested a copy of the letter.
Jason Newton, a Harvard spokesperson, said in a statement to the Globe the university will “continue to defend its core, legally protected principles against unfounded retaliation by the federal government.”
“This investigation is yet another abusive and retaliatory action — the latest of many — that the administration has initiated against Harvard,” Newton said, noting the Trump administration has previously eliminated or threatened to cut billions of dollars in funding, including for medical and scientific research, “which will lead to devastating consequences for our nation’s health, economic prosperity, and scientific leadership.”
The federal Department of Education also informed Harvard earlier this month the university’s admission policies were under a compliance review to determine if it racially discriminated against undergraduate applicants, the Times reported, citing a separate letter from the agency the Times reviewed.
Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the Education Department, said in a statement to the Globe that a compliance review of Harvard “is long overdue.” She also cited an investigation the department announced last month into allegations of racial discrimination by the Harvard Law Review in its policies around membership and article selection, as well as what she described as “overt race and sex targets in the University’s hiring practices.”
“These publicized failures point to an urgent need for a thorough review of Harvard’s records,” Biedermann said.
In a ruling on lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2023, the Supreme Court ended the use of race-based affirmative action in college admissions. The decision overturned nearly half a century of precedent and deprived selective universities of a tool that college leaders said was essential for campus diversity.
The ruling had a swift impact on college admissions, as Harvard reported a decline in enrollment among Black first-year students last fall. Amherst College, MIT, Tufts University, and Brown University also reported enrolling a smaller percentage of Black first-year students in the fall of 2024 compared to the prior year.
Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions, the group that spearheaded the lawsuit over Harvard’s admissions policies, said he would encourage the Justice Department “to investigate the admission practices at Harvard and all of our nation’s competitive colleges.”
“It is likely many higher education institutions are using racial proxies in their admission policies,” he said in a text message Thursday. “The Department of Justice and the Department of Education should collect and analyze application and admission data to ensure all schools are in compliance with the Supreme Court‘s ruling striking down racial preferences.”
Newton, the Harvard spokesperson, said employees who review applications do not have access to self-reported race and ethnicity data from the applicants and that the admissions office does not consider or review the racial and ethnic composition of the applying class until the admissions cycle is completed. Class demographic data is released only after the start of the new academic year.
Newton said Harvard made immediate changes to its admissions policies in the wake of the Supreme Court‘s ruling and updated its training materials for admissions team members who read applications. He said alumni volunteers who interview Harvard applicants in their local communities were instructed not to ask about or consider an applicant‘s race.
Essay questions were also changed to move away from identity-based questions, replacing them with questions asking applicants to reflect on how they believe they will contribute to Harvard’s academic community, Newton said.
James S. Murphy, director of postsecondary policy at Education Reform Now, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan think tank, called the DOJ’s new move to investigate Harvard “extraordinary” and said such allegations against a higher education institution would typically be investigated by the Department of Education’s office of civil rights.
“But the Trump administration, they’re not really interested in finding out the truth or getting real answers,” he said. “This is a witch hunt.”
“There is no reason to think of this as anything close to a good-faith investigation into a civil rights violation,” he added.
Kristin Penner, a 1989 alumna and a co-founder and board member at the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard, said of the DOJ’s latest action, “It stands in a long line of attempts to impugn the qualifications of Black people and others who are underrepresented in spaces like Harvard, rather than take down the barriers of structural racism that impede equal opportunity in all facets of higher education.”
The DOJ’s letter to Harvard about the False Claims Act investigation did not detail how Harvard may have defrauded the government, but instead demanded Harvard produce a trove of documents and written answers to detailed questions in the next three weeks, according to a copy of the request published by the Times.
The government is also seeking text messages, emails, or other communications from Harvard officials discussing President Trump‘s executive orders earlier this year aimed at rooting out diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
The Justice Department also gave Harvard 30 days to identify a school official to testify under oath about its admissions policies — and how those polices may have changed after the Supreme Court ruling in 2023.
The nation’s oldest and wealthiest university, Harvard has been locked in a bitter battle with the administration, which is using legal threats and funding cuts to force the school to yield to Trump‘s worldview and agenda. Officials have accused Harvard of cultivating an academic environment that is rigidly leftist and intolerant of conservative viewpoints and which creates a breeding ground for rampant antisemitism that has forced many Jewish students to live in fear.
The breadth of the Trump administration’s pressure campaign since the National Institutes of Health froze $2.2 billion in research grants and contracts to Harvard little more than a month ago has grown to include a dizzying array of threats from multiple agencies.
Harvard pushed back by suing to block the funding freeze with a lawsuit filed April 21 alleging overly intrusive and illegal tactics by the government.
Since then, the sanctions have continued.
The Department of Homeland Security has threatened to block enrollment of international students, the Education Department has accused the university of failing to report large foreign donations, and Trump has threatened to revoke the school’s tax-exempt status, to name a few of the growing list of actions aimed at the Ivy League school.
On Tuesday eight federal agencies cut an additional $450 million in research funding to Harvard. In a letter advising Harvard of the new cuts, the federal antisemitism task force said the university was a “breeding ground” for liberalism, virtue signaling, and discrimination and has a long way to go to regain its standing in the academic world.
Mike Damiano of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Material from Globe wire services was used in this report.
