【文/观察者网 柳白】 "多亏了特朗普，我们才看到这场人才涌入！"奥地利科学院院长海因茨·法斯曼说。 在移民政策收紧和科研经费锐减等多重因素挤压下，美国科研人才外流愈发严重，"捡漏"的欧洲人则欣 喜不已。 美国"政客新闻网"9月29日获取的最新数据显示，美国顶尖研究人员正加速迁往欧洲等地，欧盟科研基 金项目吸引的美国申请者数量在最新一轮招标中增加了五倍，可以说是对特朗普政府削减科研经费、压 缩学术自由环境的直接回应。 报道认为，美国本土研究人员对欧洲科研资助资金的这股新兴趣浪潮，与特朗普政府执政期间美国学术 研究环境日趋恶劣脱不开干系。 这一趋势对欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩来说是一大胜利。 针对特朗普政府大幅削减学术项目资金的举 措，冯德莱恩本人牵头推动了吸引美国研究人员的相关工作。欧盟通过强调学术自由，并为有意迁往欧 洲的研究人员增加资金支持，成功将自身定位为科研人员的"避风港"。 美国科学家在实验室工作 视觉中国 欧洲研究委员会（ERC）是欧盟于2007年成立的研究基金组织，负责资助基础研究与前沿技术项目。该 机构今年春天宣布，将针对希望从美国迁来的研究人员提供的额外资金，从100万欧元翻倍至200万欧 元。 ...

诉讼称，这些举措违宪且受意识形态驱动，威胁学术自由和言论自由，将民权调查与拨款削减挂 钩，实为政治干预。加州大学系统新任校长詹姆斯·米利肯警告，若失去联邦资金，加州大学需额外筹 集40亿至50亿美元维持运转。 近日，美国特朗普政府与加州大学之间的拨款纷争愈演愈烈，一场权力、法律与学术自由之间的博 弈正在全球范围内引起高度关注。 此前，联邦政府以加州大学涉嫌"反犹主义"、违反民权法等指控为由，冻结数亿美元的科研拨款； 加州大学则迅速反击，不仅在法庭上提起抗辩，也在州级政治与舆论层面展开对抗。最新消息显示，法 院已下令恢复部分拨款，但整个冲突并未平息，反而逐步升级，美国学术体制的核心原则与联邦—州政 府之间的权力边界正在模糊。 加州州长纽森（Gavin Newsom）公开对联邦政府冻结UCLA等高校经费的做法予以强烈批评，斥责 特朗普"敲诈勒索"。 美国大学教授协会、美国教师联合会、加州大学教师协会理事会及多个工会起诉特朗普政府，指控 其通过冻结资金和苛刻要求"施加意识形态控制"。 自特朗普重返白宫以来，一再强调要"整顿高等教育体制中的偏向左翼、过度政治化"现象。他利用 行政命令和拨款条件试图对大学的招生政策、学 ...

Core Viewpoint - The funding crisis faced by Terence Tao, a renowned mathematician, highlights the increasing politicization of research funding in the United States, which is affecting the stability of the scientific research environment [2][5][6]. Group 1: Funding Crisis - Terence Tao and his research team at UCLA are unable to receive research funding, leading to a situation where they have not even received summer salaries [2][5]. - The funding freeze originated from a political issue, where the U.S. government froze nearly $600 million in federal research funds to UCLA, citing mismanagement of anti-Semitism [6][8]. - The Trump administration plans to cut the National Science Foundation (NSF) budget by half in the 2026 fiscal year, which would severely impact many scientists' funding [6][11]. Group 2: Impact on Researchers - The instability in funding has forced top scientists like Tao to seek sponsorships, shifting their focus from research to fundraising [5][9]. - Other institutions, such as Harvard, have paused doctoral admissions due to reduced NIH funding, and many laboratories are struggling to afford basic supplies [11][12]. - The current political climate has led to a significant increase in the number of researchers leaving the U.S. for more stable environments, with many considering relocating to countries like China [11][12]. Group 3: Opportunities for China - China is emerging as an attractive destination for scientists due to its stable research funding and investment in top-tier research facilities [14][15]. - To retain top talent like Terence Tao, China needs to ensure adequate funding, provide advanced research platforms, minimize administrative interference, and support scientists' personal lives [14][15][16][17]. - The situation presents an opportunity for China to enhance its scientific capabilities by attracting and retaining elite researchers, thereby improving its global standing in scientific research [17].

Core Viewpoint - The ruling by Judge Allison D. Burroughs declared that the Trump administration's freezing of over $2.6 billion in research funding to Harvard University was unconstitutional, marking a significant legal victory for Harvard and the higher education sector in the U.S. [1][2] Group 1: Legal Context and Implications - The ruling overturned the legality of the Trump administration's funding freeze tactics, providing a rare win for higher education institutions in the U.S. [2] - The court found that the funding freeze was retaliatory and violated the procedural requirements of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which mandates due process before terminating federal funding [3][4]. - A permanent injunction was issued, preventing the Trump administration from imposing any unconstitutional conditions on Harvard's funding in the future [3]. Group 2: Harvard's Response and Future Considerations - Harvard's lawsuit was initiated after the Trump administration linked billions in funding to a series of conditions, which Harvard refused to accept [3]. - Following the ruling, Harvard's president praised the decision as a defense of academic freedom and the First Amendment [7]. - Despite the victory, uncertainties remain regarding the restoration of federal funding, tax-exempt status, and the ability to enroll international students, indicating ongoing negotiations with the White House [6][7]. Group 3: Broader Impact on Higher Education - The ruling serves as a potential blueprint for other institutions facing similar pressures, demonstrating that resistance can be effective [7]. - The case highlights the contrasting legal strategies employed by Harvard compared to other institutions, which may have contributed to its success [4].

当地时间9月3日，美国波士顿联邦地区法官艾莉森·伯劳斯（Allison Burroughs）作出裁决，特朗普 政府冻结哈佛大学超26亿美元联邦资助的行为没有遵循正当程序，应恢复拨款。 这一具有里程碑意义的判决，为这所常春藤盟校与白宫长达数月的斗争赢得了一场重大胜利。 针锋相对 哈佛大学在法庭上取得胜利，但政策的不确定性依然存在。 休斯顿说，"任何公平的观察者都能看出，哈佛未能保护学生免受骚扰，纵容了长期存在的歧视。 哈佛没有宪法赋予的享有纳税人资金的权利。" 冲突背后 这场争端源于特朗普政府在4月11日发出的一封信。政府要求哈佛在校园抗议、学术方向和招生政 策上作出系统性改革，理由是该校"纵容反犹太骚扰，成为自由主义温床"。哈佛拒绝了这一要求。同一 天，政府冻结了该校220亿美元科研经费。 5月，教育部长琳达·麦克马洪（Linda McMahon）宣布，哈佛不再有资格获得新拨款，随后大量科 研合同被取消。 伯劳斯裁定，特朗普政府此前冻结并削减哈佛科研经费，是因该校拒绝接受联邦反犹太主义工作组 的要求而实施的非法报复。 她在裁决书中写道："对行政记录的审查几乎难以得出其他结论，（政府）利用反犹太主义作为掩 饰， ...

Core Points - California Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly criticized former President Donald Trump for allegedly using the Department of Justice to freeze $584 million in federal research funding to UCLA, demanding a $1 billion settlement to unfreeze the funds [1][2] - Newsom has vowed to fight back against what he describes as "political extortion" and plans to file a lawsuit to protect UCLA's academic freedom [2][3] - The proposed settlement includes a $1 billion payment from UCLA and a $172 million compensation fund for affected Jewish students, which would make it the most expensive settlement between a university and the White House to date [2][4] Funding and Financial Implications - UCLA relies heavily on federal funding, with approximately 11% of its revenue coming from federal grants and contracts [3] - The freezing of funds is seen as a significant threat to the university's financial stability and its ability to operate effectively [3][4] - The Trump administration's actions are part of a broader strategy targeting multiple universities, with Harvard being the only institution to file a lawsuit against the government while still negotiating [7] Academic Freedom and Political Context - The situation has raised concerns about academic freedom and the potential chilling effect on universities' ability to express dissenting views, particularly regarding U.S. foreign policy [6][7] - The Trump administration's actions are perceived as conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, leading to widespread debate about the implications for free speech on campuses [6][7] - Other universities, including Cornell and Harvard, are also involved in negotiations with the Trump administration, highlighting a broader trend of governmental pressure on academic institutions [7]

Group 1 - The article discusses the impact of the Trump administration's actions on the academic community in the U.S., leading to a significant number of scholars seeking refuge in European institutions, particularly in France [1][3]. - Nearly 300 scholars have applied for the "scientific refuge" program initiated by Aix-Marseille University, which aims to support researchers affected by the U.S. academic environment [3][4]. - The program promises funding for about 20 scholars over three years, highlighting the growing concern over academic freedom and the state of higher education in the U.S. [3][4]. Group 2 - Scholars, including historian Sandberg, express deep concerns about the increasing restrictions on academic research, including funding applications that prohibit certain terms like "diversity" and "women" [4]. - The article notes that many top talents are leaving the U.S. for countries like China and Canada, indicating a shift in the global academic landscape [4]. - Aix-Marseille University has received over 500 inquiries from scholars at prestigious institutions such as Johns Hopkins University, NASA, Columbia University, Yale University, and Stanford University [3].

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration aims to use its agreement with Harvard University as a "blueprint" for reforming other higher education institutions, while Harvard remains firm in its stance against compromise [1][2]. Group 1: Government Actions and Legal Proceedings - Harvard University has filed two lawsuits against the Trump administration to prevent punitive actions, including the freezing of federal funds and blocking international students from attending [2]. - A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction to stop the Trump administration from restricting Harvard's ability to accept international students, extending a temporary order previously issued [4][6]. - The Trump administration announced the cancellation of Harvard's eligibility for the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which prohibits the university from enrolling international students [6]. Group 2: Support from Alumni - Over 12,000 Harvard alumni signed a legal statement supporting the university's challenge against the Trump administration's decision to suspend over $2.2 billion in federal funding [8]. - The alumni's statement expresses shock at the government's attempts to control Harvard and other higher education institutions without due process or legal basis [8].

Core Viewpoint - Harvard University has won a preliminary injunction allowing it to continue accepting international students during the ongoing legal proceedings against the Trump administration's actions to block such admissions [1][3]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - Federal Judge Allison Burroughs issued a preliminary injunction halting the Trump administration's efforts to prevent Harvard from accepting international students, allowing the university to maintain its admissions during the case [1][3]. - Harvard filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security after it revoked the university's certification to accept foreign students and process their visa applications, which affected approximately 7,000 international students [3][4]. - The judge noted that the federal government retains the right to review Harvard's eligibility to accept international students through normal legal procedures [3][4]. Group 2: Government Actions and Responses - The Trump administration attempted to block foreign students from entering the U.S. to study at Harvard through a new announcement, which Harvard challenged in court [4][6]. - Harvard's legal team argued that the Trump administration's policies violated the university's rights to due process and academic freedom, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act [6][7]. - The university expressed that the government's actions created an atmosphere of "profound fear, anxiety, and confusion" among international students [6][7]. Group 3: Future Implications - Harvard anticipates a more binding ruling from the judge in the coming days, while continuing to develop contingency plans for international students [4][5]. - If the Trump administration persists with its actions, the case may escalate to the Supreme Court, where Harvard is expected to have a strong chance of success based on constitutional grounds [7]. - Harvard is also pursuing a separate lawsuit regarding the suspension of federal funding by the Trump administration, with the first hearing scheduled for July 21 [7].

Core Viewpoint - Harvard University has modified its existing lawsuit against the Trump administration's ban on recruiting international students, requesting the court to immediately rule to stop the enforcement of the announcement [1][2] Group 1: Legal Actions - Harvard University has filed a modified court document to block the Trump administration's announcement that imposes visa restrictions on international students [1] - The lawsuit argues that the announcement is unconstitutional and infringes on academic freedom, stating that international students contribute significantly to Harvard and the U.S. [1] - A federal judge in Massachusetts approved Harvard's request to halt the Trump administration's policy that cancels the university's eligibility to recruit foreign students [2] Group 2: Government Actions - The Trump administration has taken multiple actions against Harvard, including freezing billions of dollars in funding and threatening to revoke its tax-exempt status [2] - The administration's announcement on visa restrictions is framed as a measure to "protect national security," but Harvard contends it is an escalation of government retaliation [1]