哈佛大学表示不会遵守特朗普政府的要求
【中美创新时报2025年4月14日编译讯】（记者温友平编译）联邦官员表示，哈佛大学必须在招聘和录取方面实施“择优录取改革”，并报告违反规定的国际学生，以及其他措施。哈佛大学称这些要求不合法。《纽约时报》记者维马尔·帕特尔（Vimal Patel）对此作了下述报道。
哈佛大学周一表示，拒绝了特朗普政府要求的政策调整，成为第一所直接拒绝遵守政府要求的大学，并引发了联邦政府与美国最富有大学之间的摊牌。
其他大学也纷纷反击特朗普政府对高等教育的干预。但哈佛大学的回应实质上是称特朗普政府的要求非法，这标志着这所美国最具影响力的大学态度的重大转变。近几周，哈佛大学因屈服于特朗普政府的压力而受到批评。
特朗普政府周五致函哈佛大学，要求该校减少学生和教职员工对校务的权力；立即向联邦当局报告违规行为的外国学生；并引入外部机构，确保各院系“观点多元化”。特朗普政府并未明确“观点多元化”的含义，但通常指的是寻求一系列政治观点，包括保守派观点。
哈佛大学校长艾伦·加伯周一在给学校的一份声明中表示：“任何政府——无论哪个政党执政——都不应该规定私立大学可以教授什么课程、可以招收和聘用哪些学生、以及可以从事哪些研究和探究领域。”
自今年1月上任以来，特朗普政府大力打击大学，声称正在调查数十所学校，以消除其多元化举措以及校园内猖獗的反犹太主义。官员们已暂停了数亿美元用于全美各大学研究的联邦资金。
政府对美国最杰出的几所高校名单尤为关注。官员们已讨论将一所知名大学推翻，作为其重塑高等教育运动的一部分。他们首先瞄准的是哥伦比亚大学，然后是常春藤盟校的其他成员，包括哈佛大学。
哈佛大学一直承受着来自学生和教职员工的巨大压力，要求其更有力地抵制特朗普政府对大学和高等教育的更广泛的侵犯。
特朗普政府今年3月表示，正在审查哈佛大学约2.56亿美元的联邦合同，以及其所称的87亿美元“多年期拨款承诺”。该声明还暗示，哈佛大学在遏制校园反犹太主义方面做得不够。当时，对于哈佛大学可以采取哪些措施来满足特朗普政府的担忧，官方说法并不明确。
上个月，哈佛大学 800 多名教职员工签署了一封信，敦促学校“对这些反民主的攻击进行协调反对”。
周一，哈佛大学似乎朝着这个方向迈出了一步。在拒绝校方要求的信中，加伯博士暗示哈佛大学别无选择。
他写道：“大学不会放弃其独立性，也不会放弃其宪法权利。无论是哈佛大学还是其他任何私立大学，都不能允许自己被联邦政府接管。”
美国政府周五致函哈佛大学，要求进行一系列非同寻常的改革，重塑哈佛大学，并将哈佛大学前所未有的运营控制权移交给联邦政府。这些改革将违反大学校园所珍视的原则，包括学术自由。
特朗普政府要求哈佛采取的一些行动包括：
对所有现任和未来的教职员工进行剽窃检查。
与特朗普政府共享所有招聘数据，并在“改革实施”期间接受招聘审计，至少持续到 2028 年。
向联邦政府提供所有录取数据，包括被拒绝和被录取的申请人的信息，按种族、国籍、平均成绩和标准化考试成绩分类。
立即关闭任何与多样性、公平性和包容性相关的节目。
特朗普政府称其“反犹太主义记录恶劣”，对学术项目进行全面整顿，包括对某些院系和项目进行外部审计。这些院系和项目包括神学院、教育研究生院、公共卫生学院和医学院等。
特朗普政府在信中表示：“哈佛大学近年来未能满足联邦政府投资所需的知识和公民权利条件。”
上个月，在特朗普政府削减了哥伦比亚大学4亿美元联邦资金后，哥伦比亚大学同意了联邦政府提出的重大让步。它同意将其中东研究系置于不同的监管之下，并成立了一支由36名“特别警员”组成的新安全部队，授权逮捕和驱逐校园人员。
对哈佛的要求有所不同，而且更为广泛，涉及到大学基本运作的许多方面。
哈佛大学周一对此作出回应，称过去 15 个月内已做出重大改变，以改善校园氛围和打击反犹太主义，包括对违反大学政策的学生进行纪律处分、向促进意识形态多样性的项目投入资源以及加强安全保障。
哈佛大学表示，遗憾的是，校方忽视了学校的努力，反而以非法方式侵犯学校的自由。
“大学不会放弃其独立性，也不会放弃其宪法权利，”哈佛大学表示。“无论是哈佛大学还是任何其他私立大学，都不能允许自己被联邦政府接管。”
此前，各大学因未能更有力地抵制特朗普的攻击而受到广泛批评，哈佛大学周一采取的强硬姿态受到了整个高等教育界的赞扬。
哈佛大学本身近几个月来一直受到抨击，因为其采取了一系列举措，教职员工称这些举措是为了安抚特朗普，包括聘请一家与总统关系密切的游说公司，以及驱逐中东研究中心的教职员工领导。
哈佛大学一个教师团体上周提起诉讼，试图阻止政府兑现其撤回对大学联邦资金的威胁。提起诉讼的美国大学教授协会（American Association of University Professors）哈佛分会法学教授兼财务秘书尼古拉斯·鲍伊（Nikolas Bowie）对哈佛拒绝特朗普政府要求的做法表示赞赏。
“我感谢加伯校长的勇气和领导力，”鲍伊博士说。“他的回应表明，敲诈勒索是无法谈判的。”
代表华盛顿多所高校的美国教育委员会主席泰德·米切尔表示，哈佛大学的做法可能会鼓舞其他校园领导，让他们“松一口气”。
“这给了其他人更多的机会，部分原因是，如果哈佛不这么做，它就会对其他人说，‘你们没有机会’，”西方学院前校长米切尔博士说。“这让人们感受到了可能性。”
他将哈佛大学的回应描述为“一份路线图，指引各机构如何反对政府干涉学校决策。”他还补充道：“无论是反犹太主义，还是择优录用或择优录取，学术事业的基本结构都应该由大学而不是政府来决定。”
来自马里兰州的22岁哈佛大学高年级学生伊桑·凯利表示，加伯博士周一的讲话让他松了一口气。他说，他和许多同学一直担心学校会屈服于特朗普政府的要求。
“人们非常担心哈佛大学会在政治压力下屈服，尤其是在特朗普政府如此积极地试图控制高等教育的情况下，”凯利先生说。他补充说，看到加伯博士划清界限“很重要”。
Stephanie Saul 、Alan Blinder和 Miles Herszenhorn 对本文亦有贡献。
题图：哈佛大学一栋有着高大柱子的建筑从内部照明。特朗普政府要求哈佛大学向政府报告违反校园行为规范的外国学生。图片来源：Sophie Park 为《纽约时报》拍摄
附原英文报道：
Harvard Says It Will Not Comply With Trump Administration’s Demands
Federal officials said Harvard must enact “merit-based reform” in hiring and admissions and report international students who broke rules, among other steps. Harvard called the demands unlawful.
A Harvard building with tall columns is lit from inside.
The Trump administration demanded that Harvard report foreign students who commit campus conduct violations to the government.Credit…Sophie Park for The New York Times
By Vimal Patel
April 14, 2025
Harvard University said on Monday that it had rejected policy changes requested by the Trump administration, becoming the first university to directly refuse to comply with the administration’s demands and setting up a showdown between the federal government and the nation’s wealthiest university.
Other universities have pushed back against the Trump administration’s interference in higher education. But Harvard’s response, which essentially called the Trump administration’s demands illegal, marked a major shift in tone for the nation’s most influential school, which has been criticized in recent weeks for capitulating to Trump administration pressure.
A letter the Trump administration sent to Harvard on Friday demanded that the university reduce the power of students and faculty members over the university’s affairs; report foreign students who commit conduct violations immediately to federal authorities; and bring in an outside party to ensure that each academic department is “viewpoint diverse,” among other steps. The administration did not define what it meant by viewpoint diversity, but it has generally referred to seeking a range of political views, including conservative perspectives.
“No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” said Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, in a statement to the university on Monday.
Since taking office in January, the Trump administration has aggressively targeted universities, saying it is investigating dozens of schools as it moves to eradicate diversity efforts and what it says is rampant antisemitism on campus. Officials have suspended hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds for research at universities across the country.
The administration has taken a particular interest in a short list of the nation’s most prominent schools. Officials have discussed toppling a high-profile university as part of their campaign to remake higher education. They took aim first at Columbia University, then at other members of the Ivy League, including Harvard.
Harvard, for its part, has been under intense pressure from its own students and faculty to be more forceful in resisting the Trump administration’s encroachment on the university and on higher education more broadly.
The Trump administration said in March that it was examining about $256 million in federal contracts for Harvard, and an additional $8.7 billion in what it described as “multiyear grant commitments.” The announcement went on to suggest that Harvard had not done enough to curb antisemitism on campus. At the time, it was vague about what the university could do to satisfy Trump administration concerns.
Last month, more than 800 faculty members at Harvard signed a letter urging the university to “mount a coordinated opposition to these anti-democratic attacks.”
The university appeared to take a step in that direction on Monday. In his letter rejecting the administration’s demands, Dr. Garber suggested that Harvard had little alternative.
“The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” he wrote. “Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government.”
The government’s letter to Harvard on Friday demanded an extraordinary set of changes that would have reshaped the university and ceded an unprecedented degree of control over Harvard’s operations to the federal government. The changes would have violated principles that are held dear on colleges campuses, including academic freedom.
Some of the actions that the Trump administration demanded of Harvard were:
Conducting plagiarism checks on all current and prospective faculty members.
Sharing all its hiring data with the Trump administration, and subjecting itself to audits of its hiring while “reforms are being implemented,” at least through 2028.
Providing all admissions data to the federal government, including information on both rejected and admitted applicants, sorted by race, national origin, grade-point average and performance on standardized tests.
Immediately shutting down any programming related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
Overhauling academic programs that the Trump administration says have “egregious records on antisemitism,” including placing certain departments and programs under an external audit. The list includes the Divinity School, the Graduate School of Education, the School of Public Health and the Medical School, among many others.
“Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment,” the Trump administration letter said.
Last month, after the Trump administration stripped $400 million in federal funds from Columbia University, Columbia agreed to major concessions demanded by the federal government. It agreed to place its Middle Eastern studies department under different oversight and to create a new security force of 36 “special officers” empowered to arrest and remove people from campus.
The demands on Harvard were different, and much more expansive, touching on many aspects of the university’s basic operations.
In Harvard’s response on Monday, it said it had already made major changes over the last 15 months to improve its campus climate and counter antisemitism, including disciplining students who violate university policies, devoting resources to programs that promote ideological diversity, and improving security.
Harvard said it was unfortunate that the administration had ignored the university’s efforts and moved instead to infringe on the school’s freedom in unlawful ways.
“The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Harvard said. “Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government.”
The forceful posture taken by Harvard on Monday was applauded across higher education, after universities had drawn widespread criticism for failing to resist Mr. Trump’s attacks more aggressively.
Harvard itself had been under fire for a series of moves in recent months that faculty members said were taken to placate Mr. Trump, including hiring a lobbying firm with close ties to the president and pushing out the faculty leaders of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies.
A Harvard faculty group filed a lawsuit last week, seeking to block the administration from carrying out its threat to withdraw federal funding from the university. Nikolas Bowie, a law professor and secretary-treasurer of Harvard’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors, the group that filed the suit, applauded Harvard’s rejection of the Trump administration’s demands.
“I’m grateful for President Garber’s courage and leadership,” said Dr. Bowie. “His response recognizes that there’s no negotiating with extortion.”
Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, which represents many colleges and universities in Washington, said Harvard’s approach could embolden other campus leaders, whom he said were “breathing a sigh of relief.”
“This gives more room for others to stand up, in part because if Harvard hadn’t, it would have said to everyone else, ‘You don’t stand a chance,’” said Dr. Mitchell, a former president of Occidental College. “This gives people a sense of the possible.”
He described Harvard’s response as “a road map for how institutions could oppose the administration on this incursion into institutional decision-making.” He added, “Whether it’s antisemitism or doing merit-based hiring or merit-based admissions, the basic texture of the academic enterprise needs to be decided by the university, not by the government.”
Ethan Kelly, 22, a senior at Harvard from Maryland, said that Monday’s message from Dr. Garber was a relief. He said that he and many of his classmates have been concerned that their school would cave to the Trump administration’s demands.
“There’s been so much concern that Harvard would fold under political pressure, especially with how aggressive the Trump administration has been in trying to control higher education,” Mr. Kelly said. Seeing Dr. Garber draw a clear line, he added, was something “that matters.”
Stephanie Saul, Alan Blinder and Miles Herszenhorn contributed reporting.
