Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government's recent ban on Harvard University from enrolling international students has sparked significant controversy, with implications for the university's reputation and the broader academic landscape in the U.S. [1][2] Group 1: Government Actions and Legal Responses - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's SEVP certification, prohibiting the university from enrolling international students, effective from the 2025-2026 academic year [1] - Harvard University has filed a lawsuit against the federal government, claiming the decision infringes on constitutional rights and federal laws [2] - A federal judge has temporarily extended a ban on the government's policy, allowing Harvard to continue accepting international students with valid visas [2] Group 2: Impact on International Students - International students make up over 27% of Harvard's total student body, with approximately 20% of them being from China [3] - Harvard currently hosts nearly 6,800 international students from over 140 countries, primarily in graduate programs [3] Group 3: Broader Implications for U.S. Higher Education - The U.S. government's actions are part of a broader trend of threatening funding to universities that do not comply with certain policies, leading to significant cuts in federal funding for institutions like Columbia University [3] - The Trump administration's policies have reportedly diminished the attractiveness of U.S. higher education, with a 40% year-over-year decline in searches for U.S. doctoral programs from European students [5] - Other global universities are actively reaching out to Harvard students affected by the ban, with around 100 French universities considering measures to assist them [6] Group 4: Academic Freedom and Research Funding - The government's intervention in university admissions is seen as politicizing education and undermining academic freedom, which could damage the U.S.'s reputation as a global academic center [6] - Proposed budget cuts for the 2026 fiscal year threaten significant reductions in research funding, including a 37% cut to the National Institutes of Health and over 50% to the National Science Foundation [6]

Core Viewpoint - The policies of the Trump administration have led to a significant decline in the U.S. scientific community, characterized by research stagnation and talent outflow, threatening the country's long-standing leadership in global scientific innovation [1][2][4]. Group 1: Impact on Research Institutions - The Trump administration has taken aggressive actions against top universities, including freezing billions in funding and threatening tax-exempt status, which has resulted in the halt of critical health-related research [2][3]. - Federal research institutions have seen substantial staff reductions, with thousands of positions cut from agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [2][3]. - The proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 includes drastic cuts to research funding, with a 37% reduction for the National Institutes of Health and over 50% for the National Science Foundation, alongside significant cuts to climate and ecological research [2][3]. Group 2: Long-term Consequences - The systematic impact of the Trump administration's policies on U.S. scientific innovation is expected to take decades to repair, as rebuilding trust in academic freedom and international collaboration is crucial [3][4]. - The reduction in research funding and withdrawal from international climate research collaborations are likely to hinder global scientific cooperation, particularly in public health and environmental research [3][4]. - The prioritization of "utility science" that directly translates to economic and geopolitical advantages has led to a neglect of basic research, which is now facing scrutiny and funding cuts [3][4]. Group 3: Global Research Landscape - The U.S. is experiencing a shift towards a more decentralized global research landscape, as other countries increase investments to attract talent, with a reported 32% rise in overseas job applications from U.S. researchers [4][5]. - Initiatives in Europe and Australia aim to draw top research talent away from the U.S., indicating a potential reconfiguration of the global scientific community [4][5]. - This trend may lead to multiple regional centers of research excellence, fostering new opportunities for collaboration across different fields [5].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing conflict between Harvard University and the Trump administration over the recruitment of international students has raised significant concerns about academic freedom and the future of international education in the U.S. [1][3][4] Group 1: Impact on Harvard University - The Trump administration's decision to revoke Harvard's eligibility to enroll international students has created a crisis for thousands of students, forcing them to consider transferring or facing loss of legal status [2][4] - Harvard University has responded by filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming that the actions taken are illegal and lack necessary procedures [4][6] - The university's international student population, approximately 6,800, constitutes about 27% of the total student body, highlighting the critical role these students play in the institution's financial structure [7] Group 2: Broader Implications for U.S. Education - The Trump administration's actions are not isolated to Harvard; they reflect a growing trend affecting multiple U.S. educational institutions, leading to a chilling effect on academic freedom [3][15] - The economic contribution of international students to the U.S. is substantial, with last year's international student population generating approximately $43 billion in revenue [8] - Concerns are rising about the potential decline in international student enrollment, which could have long-term negative effects on U.S. higher education and research funding [8][10] Group 3: Global Response and Talent Migration - The political climate in the U.S. is prompting many international students, particularly from China, to reconsider their future in American academia, with some opting for opportunities in Europe or returning to their home countries [12][14] - Several universities in Hong Kong and Europe are actively recruiting students affected by U.S. policies, indicating a shift in the global academic landscape [13][14] - The potential loss of top talent from the U.S. could reshape the future of higher education, as institutions abroad seek to attract those disillusioned by the current U.S. educational environment [11][15]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a legal battle between Harvard University and the Trump administration regarding the revocation of Harvard's international student enrollment status, highlighting the implications for academic freedom and government overreach in educational policies [1][2][8]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - A federal judge in Massachusetts, Allison Burroughs, indicated that a preliminary injunction will be issued to prevent the Trump administration from revoking Harvard's international student enrollment status [1]. - The Trump administration had previously notified Harvard that its "Student and Exchange Visitor Program" (SEVP) certification would be revoked, requiring international students to leave within 72 hours [2]. - The judge emphasized the need to maintain the status quo to protect Harvard and its international students until the administrative process is completed [3]. Group 2: Government Actions and Implications - The government altered its stance before the hearing, allowing Harvard 30 days to contest the revocation, but the judge deemed it necessary to protect the university's rights [3]. - If Harvard can provide evidence that the government's actions were motivated by dissatisfaction with its liberal stance, the court may rule that the government's actions violate constitutional rights, including the First Amendment (freedom of speech and academic freedom) and the Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection) [5][21]. Group 3: Broader Context - The conflict represents a broader clash between liberal universities, exemplified by Harvard, and a conservative government, with Harvard symbolizing elite education and liberal values [9][10]. - The Trump administration's policies targeting higher education institutions aim to weaken the structural advantages of liberal universities in the U.S. discourse and knowledge systems [13][14]. - Harvard's financial dependence on federal funding for research and student loans complicates its autonomy, as federal funding constitutes approximately 11% of its total operating revenue [18][19]. Group 4: Future Legal Landscape - Harvard is also challenging the Trump administration's decision to freeze approximately $3 billion in federal research funding, with a hearing scheduled for July 2025 [17]. - The case is expected to progress through the U.S. federal court system, potentially reaching the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which is known for its liberal leanings [28][29]. - The outcome of this legal battle may have significant implications for the relationship between academic institutions and government policies, particularly regarding academic freedom and institutional autonomy [8][30].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the escalating conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard University, focusing on the implications for international students and the broader academic landscape in the U.S. [2][15] Group 1: Trump's Actions Against Harvard - The Trump administration has initiated a series of actions against Harvard, including freezing over $2.2 billion in federal funding and threatening to revoke the university's tax-exempt status [6][7]. - On May 22, the Trump administration announced the cancellation of Harvard's eligibility for the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SVEP), effectively banning the university from enrolling international students [7][15]. - Harvard has responded by filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming that the government's actions violate the First Amendment and other federal laws, and have a "direct and devastating impact" on over 7,000 visa holders [7][8]. Group 2: Legal Implications and Harvard's Position - Legal experts suggest that Harvard has a strong chance of winning the case, as the Trump administration's actions may conflict with constitutional rights related to freedom of speech and academic freedom [9][15]. - The article highlights that the government's administrative measures must adhere to due process and proportionality principles, which may not be met in this case [8][9]. - The temporary restraining order issued by a federal judge indicates that the court may prioritize the protection of students' interests while reviewing the legality of the Trump administration's actions [8][9]. Group 3: Broader Implications for Higher Education - The conflict raises concerns about the future of international students in U.S. higher education, as they represent a significant source of tuition revenue and talent [15][16]. - The article notes that international students make up over 27% of Harvard's student body and contribute to the academic and financial vitality of U.S. universities [15]. - Experts warn that aggressive policies against international students could harm the U.S.'s global standing in higher education and its economic interests [15][16].

Group 1 - The Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell emphasized the importance of protecting democracy and academic freedom during his speech at Princeton University's graduation ceremony, directly responding to recent policies from the Trump administration that target higher education [3][4] - Powell described American universities as "critical national assets" and highlighted their role in scientific innovation and economic vitality, urging graduates to actively defend democratic values [3][4] - The ongoing conflict between Powell and Trump has escalated, with Trump criticizing Powell for slow interest rate cuts and suggesting potential legal actions to remove him, despite the Supreme Court ruling that the president cannot unilaterally dismiss the Fed chairman [4] Group 2 - The Federal Reserve is currently maintaining interest rates due to uncertainties surrounding Trump's tariff policies, with Chicago Fed President Charles Evans indicating that any policy adjustments are unlikely until trade war impacts become clearer [4] - Powell's speech is seen as a declaration of defense for institutional integrity, revealing a dual crisis facing the U.S. financial and academic systems: interference in central bank independence threatens monetary policy credibility, while suppression of higher education could undermine national innovation [4]

2025.05. 23 本文字数：1333，阅读时长大约2.5分钟 作者 | 第一财 经 孙卓 当地时间周四（5月22日），美国国土安全部部长诺姆（Kristi Noem）宣布，美国政府将终止哈佛 大学的国际学生和交流访问者项目（SEVP）认证。这意味着，哈佛大学将无法再招收外国学生，现 有数千留学生必须在转学和离开美国之间选择。 根据最新数据， 目前哈佛共有约6800名国际学生，占总学生人数的27%。 针对国土安全部的声明，哈佛大学称此举"违法"，并表示正在努力为学生提供指导。 "我们全力致力于维护哈佛大学接待国际学生和学者的能力，他们来自140多个国家和地区，为哈佛 大学乃至整个国家做出了巨大的贡献。"哈佛大学媒体关系总监牛顿（Jason Newton）表示，"我 们正在迅速行动，为哈佛社区成员提供指导和支持。这一报复性行动可能对哈佛社区和我们的国家造 成严重损害，并损害哈佛大学的学术和研究使命。" 弦外之音 在过去一个月以来，特朗普政府对哈佛的行动不断升级，他们从该校撤回的联邦资金总额已接近30 亿美元。哈佛大学已就此提起诉讼，预计国土安全部本周的最新行动很快会引发第二次法律挑战。 在宣布取消哈佛录取国 ...

Core Points - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced the termination of Harvard University's SEVP certification, affecting approximately 6,800 international students who make up 27% of the total student body [1][2] - Harvard University has labeled the government's action as "illegal" and is working to provide guidance to its students, emphasizing the contributions of international students to the university and the nation [2] - The Trump administration has been escalating actions against Harvard, with nearly $30 billion in federal funding withdrawn, and Harvard is expected to challenge this latest action legally [2][3] Group 1 - The termination of SEVP certification means Harvard cannot enroll foreign students, forcing current international students to choose between transferring or leaving the U.S. [1][2] - Harvard's media relations director stated that the government's actions could severely damage the university's academic and research mission [2] - The government has warned other universities that they could face similar consequences as Harvard if they do not ensure a safe learning environment free from discrimination [2][3] Group 2 - The government cited Harvard's failure to provide detailed records of foreign students, including any misconduct, as the reason for the SEVP certification revocation [3] - A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's attempt to terminate the legal status of international students, indicating potential legal challenges ahead [3] - The Trump administration has targeted Harvard and six other universities for punitive funding cuts, with Harvard facing the most significant impact, including threats to freeze $2.2 billion in long-term funding [4] Group 3 - The Trump administration's actions are seen as part of a broader anti-elite agenda, targeting prestigious universities that often support values opposed by the administration [5] - The administration has criticized Harvard for hiring prominent Democrats in teaching and leadership roles, reflecting a desire for reform in private colleges and schools across the U.S. [5]

Core Viewpoint - Harvard University is in a conflict with the Trump administration over academic freedom and federal funding, with Harvard refusing to comply with demands to change its policies regarding diversity and anti-Semitism [1][2][4][5]. Group 1: Harvard's Response to Government Pressure - Harvard University President Alan Garber issued a public letter rejecting the Trump administration's demands, emphasizing the university's commitment to independence and constitutional rights [1][5]. - Following the refusal, the Trump administration announced the freezing of $2.2 billion in federal funding and $60 million in project contracts for Harvard [5][8]. - Harvard has initiated a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming that the government is attempting to manipulate academic decisions through funding threats [2][9]. Group 2: Financial Implications for Harvard - Harvard's endowment is approximately $53.2 billion, but the university relies on federal funding for a significant portion of its operational costs, with about two-thirds of its budget coming from various sources, including federal research grants [6][7]. - The freezing of federal funds is expected to disrupt ongoing research projects and could lead to layoffs among faculty and staff [16][18]. - The university's financial structure limits immediate access to its endowment, as a significant portion is earmarked for specific purposes, such as scholarships and academic programs [7]. Group 3: Broader Implications for Higher Education - Over 100 universities have expressed solidarity with Harvard, opposing the government's excessive interference in higher education [2][9]. - Public opinion is largely against the Trump administration's approach to higher education, with 56% of Americans disapproving of the government's actions [16]. - The ongoing conflict may lead to a decrease in international student enrollment in U.S. universities, impacting the overall academic landscape and research capabilities [19][20].

Core Viewpoint - The departure of Matthias Doepke from Northwestern University highlights the growing concerns among academics regarding the current academic environment in the U.S., particularly under the Trump administration's policies that have increasingly targeted international students and scholars [4][9][18]. Group 1: Academic Environment - Doepke expressed that the academic atmosphere in the U.S. has shifted significantly, with a decline in the welcoming nature towards international students and scholars compared to when he first arrived [8][24]. - The tightening of policies under the Trump administration has led to reduced research funding and stricter scrutiny of international students and faculty, resulting in visa revocations and deportations [9][10][17]. - The uncertainty surrounding visa statuses has created a climate of fear among international scholars, making it difficult for them to pursue academic careers in the U.S. [22][31]. Group 2: Personal Experience and Decision - Doepke, who has lived in the U.S. for over 30 years and became a citizen in 2014, decided to leave due to the current environment not being conducive for raising a family and pursuing research [5][3]. - He has taken a position at the London School of Economics (LSE) and has expressed that many scholars are contemplating leaving the U.S., although practical challenges make it difficult for them to do so quickly [12][30]. - The decision to leave was influenced by a combination of factors, including concerns about the safety of his family and the overall academic culture shifting towards a less supportive environment for scientific exploration [11][16][21]. Group 3: Future Implications - The trend of scholars leaving the U.S. could lead to a significant loss of talent, as many may choose to pursue opportunities in Canada, Europe, or other regions with more favorable academic environments [31][34]. - Doepke noted that the current situation may deter future generations of international students from pursuing their studies in the U.S., as the opportunities that once existed are diminishing [24][25]. - The potential rise of other countries, such as China, as new centers for research and development could reshape the global academic landscape if the U.S. continues to lose its appeal [29].