What the loss of international students could mean for the U.S.
44:15 Share

They said that since I worked full-time, I wouldn't be able to go to school. But with WGU, I was able to do my classes on my own time and take all my tests online when it suited me best. Learn more at wgu.edu.

Support for this podcast comes from It's Revolutionary, a podcast from Massachusetts 250. Northampton isn't just a place, it's a promise. A promise of safety, identity, and belonging. Stick around until the end of this episode for the story of how one drag king found home there. WBUR Podcasts, Boston.

These are disconcerting times for international students in America. The fallout of President Trump's attempt to strip Harvard University of its right to enroll foreign students is being felt across the country and could threaten research, science, and innovation for years to come.

While a federal judge has sided with Harvard for now, the legal battle is threatening international scholarship at the nation's oldest university and beyond. It's quite frankly just sad, right? You know, it's a situation where nobody wins and everybody loses. For international students, it's obviously a very difficult situation to exist in. Uncertainty around the promise of like this dream of education that brought you here, right?

That's Chris, a foreign graduate student at Harvard University. He spoke with us on condition that we use only his first name because he fears retribution from the government. We'll hear more from Chris later in the show. Harvard is pushing back hard against the Trump administration, which accuses the university of anti-Semitism and of promoting leftist points of views.

At Trump's command, more than $3 billion in research grants and contracts have been frozen. But by far the biggest blow would be to end Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students, who comprise more than a quarter of the student population. The administration has demanded that the university turn over information about these students, 7,000 of them. And Trump has even suggested that Harvard should cap their numbers at 15%. We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools. They can't get in.

because we have foreign students there. But I want to make sure that the foreign students are people that can love our country. We don't want to see shopping centers exploding. We don't want to see the kind of riots that you had. And I'll tell you what, many of those students didn't go anywhere. Many of those students were troublemakers caused by the radical left lunatics in this country. Trump was referring there to last year's protests against Israel's war in Gaza.

Now, while some of those protests were raucous, the vast majority of them at Harvard and across the country were peaceful. Trump's critics say his attacks harm not only free speech, but a major source of U.S. strength. Many foreign students are engaged in cutting-edge research in medicine, technology, environmental sciences, and the humanities that make Harvard and many other American universities the envy of the world. Here's Ted Mitchell, the president of the American Council on Education.

The international students who come here are quite often the very best, the very brightest, the most ambitious students from all over the world. It makes little sense for the Trump administration to be cutting off this important part of what Harvard provides to the U.S. and the world. I'm Anthony Brooks, and this is On Point. This hour, Trump's war on higher ed and what America loses if foreign students are banished.

Stephanie Saul joins me now. She's a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and an education reporter for The New York Times who writes primarily about colleges and universities. Stephanie, welcome. Thank you, Anthony. Let's back up a bit and talk about the origins of Trump's fight with Harvard. When did it begin and why? You know, I think this really began during the first Trump administration. It's really nothing new. I mean, even then,

In 2020, his administration had ordered an investigation of donations to Harvard and Yale from foreign countries. There was also a move during his first administration to tax the endowments of wealthy universities, which affects the Ivy League.

And I think, you know, the origins of this, as you pointed out, are that the president says he believes that universities are hotbeds of anti-Semitism and also that they're promoting liberal thought, right?

But I think there's also a bit of an effort to generate populist support for his administration and for Republicans generally. You know, the University of Chicago did a poll recently, and one of the questions was, how do you view Ivy League schools like Harvard and Yale and something like

28% of people polled said they viewed them as the enemy. Wow. So this is really capitalizing on sort of some populist, a strain of populist opinion out there. Talk a little bit. Yeah. Talk a little bit about why he's going after foreign students. What's Trump's argument there? Part of it is that, as you pointed out, he believes that foreign students are taking up

space that could be occupied by domestic students. Part of it is this kind of nationalist viewpoint. It's a reaction against globalization, I think. It's an anti-immigrant, anti-globalist sentiment.

that I think has grown in the United States and internationally as well. I mean, we've seen this crackdown on universities in other countries as well, including Turkey and Hungary. You know, I think it's a very broad sentiment that also affects the idea that universities should not be connected or operating in other countries.

And we see the latest news that came out this morning from the New York Times is that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is pressing for an investigation of Treasury Department sanctions against Harvard based on the fact that Harvard School of Public Health held some conferences in China for the purpose of assisting Harvard

Chinese conference goers in healthcare financing topics. And one of the groups that attended was a group called XPCC, which is a large state-owned corporation in China that's primarily known for cotton growing products.

However, XPCC had been subject to Treasury Department sanctions because of its treatment of Uyghurs in the northwestern most region of China. So, I mean, that's just the latest. That's just the latest. I mean, they're going after Harvard on a number of levels. We mentioned cutting off grants and contracts. And then to get back to the foreign students,

President Trump doesn't appear to be backing down following a judge's order to stay his administration's attempt to ban Harvard from accepting foreign students. So here he is in a recent press conference suggesting that he wants his administration to have a role in evaluating potential and current students. We want to have foreign students, but we want them to be checked. You know, the case of Harvard and Columbia and others, what we want to do is see their list checked.

There's no problem with that. This is anybody outside of our country, international students. So he's saying we want to have foreign students, but we want to check them, essentially. So it seems like the Trump administration is arguing they won't have a say in who Harvard educates. How is Harvard pushing back against this?

The irony of that statement is that the State Department already has the list. The government approves the visas of everyone who comes in to study. But I think, you know, Harvard is pushing back. The initial fight that began between Harvard and the Trump administration in April started after the Trump administration submitted a list of demands to Harvard to

And one of those demands was that they wanted Harvard to admit only students who were not hostile to American values as inscribed in the Constitution. When that letter, which included 10 demands, came to Harvard, I believe on April 11th,

That was what precipitated the initial lawsuit that Harvard filed in federal court in Boston. Let me just jump to, I'm interested in asking you because a federal judge has ruled twice in Harvard's favor, right? Staying the Trump administration's order, at least for now. What happens next with this case regarding foreign students? The next thing that happens is taking place on Monday in a federal court in Boston where

Judge Alison Burrows, who is the judge that ordered the temporary restraining order, is going to be holding a hearing in which she will decide whether to extend that order until this case is completed. And then, of course, after she rules, which is it's not clear when the final ruling would be in that lawsuit involving the international students,

The case would obviously be appealed and probably would end up in the Supreme Court. All right. And that's where it goes. Yeah. Who knows? It's going to be an interesting one to follow for sure. Stephanie Saul, education reporter for The New York Times. She's a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist covering higher ed. Stephanie, thanks so much for being with us. We really appreciate it.

Thank you. We're talking about the current presidential administration's move to bar Harvard from admitting foreign students. A lot more to come, including a perspective from a foreign graduate student. Stay with us. I'm Anthony Brooks. This is On Point. Support for On Point comes from Indeed. You just realized that your business needed to hire someone yesterday. How can you find amazing candidates fast? Easy. Just use Indeed. There's no need to wait. You can speed up your hiring with Indeed.

and On Point listeners will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash On Point. Just go to Indeed.com slash On Point right now and support the show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash On Point. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring? Indeed is all you need.

Support for this podcast comes from It's Revolutionary, a podcast from Massachusetts 250. In a place like Northampton, Massachusetts, the freedom to be yourself is not just celebrated, it's embraced. For one drag king, it's where he's found the space to live his truth. I really do think about it all the time. Like, I don't think there's anywhere else I could have lived my lived experience and do what I do besides Massachusetts. Stick around until the end of this podcast for his story.

Let's hear now from an international student at Harvard. Chris is a graduate student from Toronto, Canada, pursuing a dual degree at the university. He asked that we not use his full name because he's afraid of retribution from the government. Chris told me that being accepted by Harvard was a point of pride for him and his family, and that he finds the Trump administration's assault on foreign students frightening.

I remember when I first got into Harvard and just the pride on my father's face, you know, see, I could go to this school and the opportunity that came with it, all the work that went into being able to achieve this opportunity, all the work that's gone into this opportunity. And to have that, you know, last Thursday,

ripped away even, you know, for a moment before kind of the restraining order was put in place, was rattling. Chris says attending a university with students from around the world has been enormously valuable. It broadens your perspectives. And for a school that aims to educate the future citizen leaders of the world, I think that's immensely important. Being able to engage with students

from the countries that you're studying in the classroom and actually hear their life perspective rather than, you know, parachute in from a textbook. I think, you know, learning from other students' lived experiences, trying different cultural foods, you know, going to Diwali celebrations, you know, breaking a fast with a Muslim friend during Ramadan. These are all, you know, incredibly formative experiences that create better citizens, create better leaders,

And that's something that Harvard loses, an environment where international students are impressive on campus. Chris says international students come to the U.S. for a variety of reasons, including a desire to improve American society and the world. He says his goal, for example, is to figure out ways to reduce economic inequality.

I think America is like this joint collective project that we're all working on, right? Together, we put in our time, our energy, and whatever domain we're interested in. For me, it's economic inequality. For another student, it might be healthcare research. And when, you know, presidential administration comes

kind of attacks students, attacks the university, attacks the opportunity to achieve these dreams, you know, it hurts our joint project that we're, you know, something that we're building together. And so we all lose when people are unable to kind of contribute in the ways that they're best equipped. And that's, you know, something that, again, is sad.

Chris says foreign students like him are suddenly on shaky ground and might have to continue their education elsewhere, what he calls making a flight to safety. And the Trump administration's policies not only threaten his academic pursuits, but his personal goals as well. Chris's partner lives in the States and they're hoping to build a life together. But he says they're now worried that that dream could also be ripped away.

Well, John Fansmith joins me now. He's the Senior Vice President of Government Relations and National Engagement with the American Council on Education. And John Fansmith, welcome to On Point. Thank you for being with us. Hi, Anthony, and thanks so much for having me. Well, I'd love to sort of get you to respond to what you heard from Chris there and sort of give me your top line response with regard to this fight that the Trump administration is picking with Harvard over foreign students.

I think Chris really said it quite eloquently. He summarized a lot of the real benefits that international students bring to this country and really the harms that are being caused by the administration's rhetoric. And it's worth noting that

While we're talking about Harvard in particular, there's 1.1 million international students studying in the United States right now, and they are at institutions all over the country. And those institutions are community colleges and small religious institutions and large research institutions and every other type of institution in between. International students play a huge role, not just in American higher education, but in our society.

Right. 1.1 million foreign students across the country. Is it possible to sort of put a number on what that means to America just in terms of what they bring to the economy, for example?

Sure. And there are a lot of numbers you could put to the benefits of having this collective of the world's best and brightest coming to the United States. But some of the analyses that have been done have estimated that international students generate about $44 billion of economic activity in the United States each year. And that economic activity supports about 380,000 jobs. So this is not an insignificant contribution to our economy. It really is a

very powerful sector of the overall economy that these students are providing. And what do you say to one of the arguments that President Trump has made about sort of wanting to get a handle, I guess, and limit? I mean, he's talked about even putting

limiting the number of foreign students. At least he made a comment a few days back about capping foreign students at Harvard at 15%. And one of the arguments he made there was that there are lots of American students that want to go to these universities and colleges. And I guess the suggestion there is that there's less room for them because there's so many foreign students.

Well, the president is showing in that statement a real misunderstanding of how this works on a college campus. If you are a talented American student who has the skills and the ability to succeed in these programs and at these institutions, those spots are available to you. International students are not displacing American students. They're not preventing them from enrolling in those programs. It's really the opposite. International students, many of whom paid the full tuition rate,

Often, their presence helps ensure that programs are viable. There's a lot of, especially in graduate fields and STEM graduate fields in particular, where international students are a large percentage of the program. If those students weren't there, it's not that their spaces would be filled by American students. It's that those programs wouldn't have enough students to continue to be offered by the institution. So you would see areas of study simply unavailable. So again,

They are a benefit to American students looking to study in those fields. What's more, that financial subsidy I talked about, the fact that international students bring a lot of resources to them, that is used by institutions to help offset the cost, especially for low and middle income American students. They are a net benefit to American students to have international students on your campus. And then I would just highlight the other benefit. I know we're talking about economics, but Chris really made this clear.

If you are a Fortune 500 CEO and you are looking at the kind of people you want to hire, the skill set that they have in an increasingly global world,

You want people coming out of college who have experiences with people from different parts of the world, who have a familiarity with working across different cultures, who have an understanding that's gained from studying with and living among and working with people with different viewpoints and different experiences. This is hugely beneficial to the academic outcomes of American students who gain a lot from having these perspectives, having those interactions in a way that the absence of foreign students would irreparably damage.

I'd love to get your sort of take on the legal clash that's going on. As we've mentioned, a federal judge in Boston has stayed the administration's order, at least for now. The case will work its way forward. We've talked to legal scholars about this. We'll hear from one later in the show. And I guess the consensus that I'm hearing seems to be that Harvard will likely prevail in court.

So I have sort of a two-part question for you. First of all, do you believe that to be the case? And second, even if Harvard does prevail, in some degree, is the damage already done? That is, Harvard has very deep pockets to hire lawyers to fight this. But what's the effect on other universities and colleges that might not prevail?

have the wherewithal to fight this kind of stuff in court and may feel a little bit cowed by the Trump administration's approach here. Well, and I will note, unlike your later guests, I am not a legal expert, but I will say what seems abundantly clear to people who follow this issue is that Harvard should and will win in court, in part because the administration, for all of their rhetoric about Harvard's behavior, are actually the party in this case that's not following the law.

The law is very clear about what are the processes for barring either individual international students or for an institution to lose its ability to host international students. And Harvard has been in compliance with those laws and regulations. The administration has not been in their attempts to bar those students from being eligible to go to Harvard. So I think any it wouldn't take an exhaustive review of the facts for a judge to find in Harvard's favor.

Um, that said, your point is absolutely correct. Harm has already been done and it's not just at Harvard. Chris talked about how uncertain he is. This, this flee to safety, I think was his term. Yeah. Flight to safety. Right. Somewhere else. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Um, and it's not surprising that lots of students on lots of college campuses, not at Harvard, but are looking at this administration's rhetoric about announcements of, um,

Extending background checks and looking at your social media feeds and revoking visas if you express un-American views are very concerned about whether this will remain a place where they can fulfill their academic goals, their personal goals. If it's the place that America has always held itself out to be as a magnet for and a haven for the best and the brightest of the world.

And that's students who are here. If you are a talented student, especially a talented student with resources from across the world,

The United States is not your only option, and we look at countries. China is making efforts. Hong Kong institutions have announced streamlined processes for admitting international students at American institutions. Lots of other countries are looking to recruit these students because they know what we know. This is a turbocharge to your economy. It's a turbocharge to your academics. It's a turbocharge to your scientific research.

Not admitting these students is shooting ourselves in the foot and other countries are waiting eagerly to benefit from our mistake here. You know, I'm glad you mentioned that because some of the reporting that I've done on this, it dovetailed with just what you said. Government officials in Hong Kong have called on the city's universities to open their doors to those affected by Trump's attempted ban on foreign students. We know that.

We know as well that Ireland wants to become a first choice destination for international students. And I read just the other day that Germany's Minister of Culture has talked about establishing a research university for, quote, scholars in exile from the United States.

So as you suggested, other countries seem poised to – are recognizing the value of these students even if the Trump administration doesn't appear to fully appreciate the value of these students.

It's really impossible to overstate what a self-defeating policy this is. And we've discussed the enormous economic benefits. One other thing I would add to that, one study recently found that about a quarter of all billion-dollar-plus U.S. startups have a founder who was an international student at an American university. These are not students who are simply coming here, studying, and then leaving. Overwhelmingly, they stay. They contribute to our economy, often in massive ways,

And you're exactly right. Every other country in the world has not been able to compete with us for these students because we offer what other countries can't in terms of academic quality, in terms of research opportunities, in terms of the diversity of our institutional types and previously the openness and freedom of expression on our college campuses.

They are now able to compete with us in a way they haven't before, not because they've caught up with us in those areas, but because our own government is making foreign students seem unwelcome here in the United States. And we are gifting our foreign competitors a huge advantage that we previously never really had to compete with them over.

I want to hear a little bit of tape here from the Trump administration. So after instructing her department to prevent Harvard from accepting future foreign students, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appeared on Fox News to discuss the decision. She was asked if other universities ought to worry about facing similar actions from the federal government. Here's a bit of what she said.

This should be a warning to every other university to get your act together. Get your act together because we are coming to make sure that these programs, that you are facilitating an environment where students can learn, where they're safe, and that they're not discriminated against based on their race or their religion.

anti-Semitism will not be stood for and any participation with a country or an entity or a terrorist group that hates America and perpetuates this kind of violence, we will stop it and we will not allow that to happen, especially in places where our kids need to grow up and really learn what this country is about, what the world is about, and what it means to promote freedom and liberty.

So, John Fansmith, Kristi Noem there, Secretary of Homeland Security. What do you make of that? Because one of the sort of central arguments here in the Trump administration that the Trump administration has been making is student safety, especially around the issue of anti-Semitism. And that goes back to some of the protests on campus last year against Israel's war in Gaza. What do you make of that as someone who, you know, advocates for these universities? Is this a...

concern that you think is valid or cynical? You know, I don't want to necessarily ascribe their thoughts around this process, but I was struck by how Stephanie Saul earlier was talking about this and the political advantages to the administration of going after institutions like Harvard and Columbia. And I think that's very important.

It's validated by the administration's actions. We have strong and robust legal procedures for dealing with discrimination and anti-Semitism in this country. We have strong and robust provisions for dealing with foreign students who are committing crimes, who are doing things contrary to why they are here in the United States as students.

The administration isn't doing those things. They are not pursuing the legal avenues available to them. They are coming forward with these arbitrary attempts, broad-based efforts. The administration hasn't articulated in any way how barring all international students from going to Harvard addresses anti-Semitism or public safety for that matter. If they have concerns about specific students, there are a variety of tools they can use to pursue those.

They're just not willing to do the work of actually documenting where violations have occurred, doing what our country generally requires, which is to prove that someone is guilty before you punish them. They just want big gestures, often illegal,

often being blocked by the courts, that play well to people who have those hostilities towards these institutions that Stephanie was talking about before. And so I guess I am ascribing some motives to their thinking here, but it certainly does seem like a justification in search of a problem rather than an actual attempt to address what are indisputably real problems at lots of institutions and in our society, but certainly much more self-serving than a

targeted. John, you talked about the economic benefits to the nation that foreign students bring. Can you also talk, actually, you know what, I'm going to put this off until we're coming up on a break and I want to give some time to this question. And that is the idea that foreign students are also

integral to the success of universities insofar as they often pay full tuition. And if they're suddenly gone, it makes it a lot more difficult for a lot of students who can't afford full tuition. So I want to ask you about that after the break. We're talking about the Trump administration's challenge to

to the role of foreign students in American universities and what barring them from the country could mean for universities like Harvard and schools, colleges, universities across the country as well. Stay with us. I'm Anthony Brooks. This is On Point.

In late May, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ordered her department to terminate Harvard's ability to accept foreign students. She later appeared on Fox News to address the administration's reasoning for the move, alleging that Harvard endangered students and refused to cooperate with the White House. Here she is. You'll also hear some protest being played during her interview.

Harvard brought these consequences upon themselves. They have promoted and allowed violent activity on campus. They have allowed anti-Semitism participation with CCP and Chinese infiltration and

influence on their campus and they haven't protected their students. So we have given them multiple opportunities to share criminal activity with us, backgrounds on these students, to let us conduct the oversight into this program that is our responsibility and they have refused to do so. That's Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Let's also hear from Christopher Ruffo. He's a conservative activist who's had a great deal of influence on the Trump administration's

approach to higher education. He's one of the leading voices criticizing critical race theory and what he sees as elitism on a number of university and college campuses.

So he told Christopher Ruffo told PBS NewsHour that he believes schools like Harvard need to be brought down on all fronts, claiming they don't actually support diverse viewpoints in their current incarnation. Less than one percent of Harvard faculty now are conservative because they've been ruthlessly through DEI policies and other ideological preferences, you know,

but weeded out of the university departments. And so the idea that these places are bastions of free speech and open inquiry is not supported by the facts. John Fansmith is with us. He's the senior vice president of government relations and national engagement with the American Council on Education. And John, I know you're only with us for a couple more minutes, but respond to that claim by Christopher Ruffo. And this is one that you hear a lot from conservative circles and the Trump administration that

You know, that the academy is somehow this bastion of elitist, leftist-leaning thought. And this is an effort to sort of correct that, I guess. What do you make of that argument? I think most Americans are very suspicious of the idea that it is an appropriate role for the federal government.

to get involved in the running of an individual institution, but particularly in terms of directly influencing what is being taught there, especially along political lines. There are certainly lots of evidence about the political affiliation of faculty. This 1% number I would love to see the source of because what you generally find when you look at the research is it's much more balanced than it's often portrayed.

That said, certainly there is any institution should be striving to be a place where there is true freedom of ideas and earnest academic debate and free expression on their campuses. And that can be very difficult to balance.

with protecting students and making sure that speech doesn't veer over the line into threatening or hateful speech. And that's a real challenge, but it's something universities struggle with, but are always working towards. That said, we have for hundreds of years in this country, prioritized freedom of speech, ensuring those protections and have through multiple Supreme Court rulings,

codified that colleges and universities have a special place in being independent of government intervention to nurture that environment. And so when you hear people close to the president talking about, we're going to use the awesome power of the federal government to force institutions to hire professors with views we agree with, to teach courses that align with our viewpoints,

That's not what we do in a free society. That is what we have seen in countries like Turkey and Hungary and other places that Stephanie was talking about, where there are underlying political efforts to control higher education for reasons that have nothing to do with promoting free expression and civil debate. So I think you hear that. I certainly think those are the kinds of things that when presented to Harvard, we're

really clarified for the public what was going on here. It's not necessarily about protecting students. It's about

and administration's political viewpoints being enforced on college campuses. John, I want to come back to this idea that I raised before the break and just ask you about the importance of foreign students for another reason. And that is they essentially help American colleges and universities be more affordable for a bunch of people who can't pay the full cost because foreign students in general do pay the full cost. How important a concern is that?

It's a concern. And I would say, first and foremost, these students are being admitted because they bring something to the institution academically and culturally that is a real value, not just for the institution, but for the other students there. They're bringing a viewpoint. They're bringing perspective. They're studying in programs that the institution is looking to build.

But there is absolutely an economic benefit as well. This is one of the ironies of some of the president's accusations about taking their spots. A lot of international students

pay much higher tuition rates than American students do. And institutions use that money to essentially subsidize support for lower and middle income students. They make certain programs possible and they make it possible for a lot of American students who attend institutions they otherwise might not be able to afford. Right. Well, John Fansmith, Senior Vice President of Government Relations and National Engagement with the American Council on Education. Thanks so much for all your time today. We really appreciate your perspective. Thank you, Anthony. I appreciate being here.

Well, yesterday I spoke with Noah Feldman about all this. Feldman is a professor of law at Harvard Law School and chairman of the Harvard Society of Fellows. He's also the author of numerous books, including his most recent, To Be a Jew Today: A New Guide to God, Israel, and the Jewish People. I began by asking him to explain the importance of foreign students to a university like Harvard. International students matter in a lot of different ways.

They matter to the life of the university because they provide perspectives from all over the world that you can't get otherwise. So it's a very different experience to teach the First Amendment to students with some Chinese students in the classroom than it is to teach it without them there because they live in a country that's succeeding economically and militarily in many other ways but doesn't have free speech. And they're able to offer their perspective in a way that's profoundly illuminating.

So it's great for all of the students in the classroom. It's also really great because, especially in the sciences, some of the smartest students from all over the world come to study at Harvard.

And if they perform well, they are offered fellowships and eventually job opportunities in the United States, often to do research themselves. And a very meaningful number of them choose to move to the United States and even become Americans. And so in a sense, where borrowing would be a polite word, stealing would be maybe a more obvious word, the smartest people from all over the world to advance science and technology and medicine here in the United

And that's a tremendous advantage. And we only get that if we have the best students in the world coming to study at Harvard, which we have had. So that's another huge advantage. And that's not just an advantage for the university. That's an advantage for the whole country. It's a kind of national security advantage. And it's an advantage for our economy as well.

So now a federal judge has sided with Harvard and issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration. You're a legal expert. Do you expect Harvard to prevail in the long run in this case?

I do. Definitely on the international student part where a federal judge has twice blocked different efforts by the Trump administration. But even more broadly, on the overall question, which is also before the judge, of the Trump administration's efforts to attack the university on many, many different fronts, cutting off all of our research funding and attestation.

attempting to pull our, at least they've said they want to attempt to pull our 501c3 tax exam status. On the whole panoply of things that Trump is doing, I am pretty confident that Harvard is going to win. I'm very confident that we'll win in the district court and the court of appeals. And I'm very confident that we will win ultimately in the Supreme Court as well. And the reason for that is pretty straightforward.

It's that every single thing that Trump has done is a violation of Harvard's free speech rights. And that's the most important issue for the courts here. There are also various procedural things that the Trump administration has done wrong, glad to talk about those, but the core reason is

is that the Trump administration is trying to force the university to teach what it wants, to hire the people the Trump administration wants it to hire, and to admit the students the Trump administration wants us to admit. And those all violate our free speech and free expression rights. Now, let's assume that Harvard does win, and my guess is that you're correct.

does Trump's case against Harvard chill academic freedom at other schools who might not have Harvard's deep pockets to be able to fight back? In other words, even if Harvard does prevail in this case against Trump, is the damage in some way already done?

Well, yes to the first, but not yet for the second. Okay. Yes in the sense that there is chilling going on right now. You know, there are lots of universities around the country whom Trump has targeted, not to the degree that he's targeted Harvard, but whom he's targeted, that have not gone to court and stood on their rights and demanded that the Constitution be enforced to protect them, even though they would win the same way we're gonna win.

Because they're scared and I don't blame them for being scared You know the administration has Trump administration has tremendous resources of the federal government at its disposal it can go after a university in myriad ways as in fact, it's been doing and You know, the potential loss of funding can be devastating for institutions. It would be devastating even for Harvard Which is a very well resourced University. So the chilling effect is already there as for the longer term

If the courts ultimately vindicate the rights of Harvard and other universities to stand up for their beliefs and to teach what they want with their proper academic freedom to the students they want,

Then the word will go out across the country that no future presidential administration can do this. And I think that will go some way to repairing some of the damage to free speech that's happening right now. So in the long run, I'm an optimist about this. But in the short run and even in the medium run, you're absolutely right that there's a real threat to free speech. Well,

Why do you think Trump is picking this fight with Harvard over the right to admit foreign students and the other issues that you brought up? What's motivating President Trump? Trump has a short-term goal and a longer-term goal. The short-term goal is to grab headlines by being in a fight with the university that might be the most prominent university in the country and maybe even in the world. And Trump knows perfectly well that when he goes after Harvard, he makes a headline.

And each time Trump has gone after Harvard, the courts have stepped in thus far and said, you can't do that. And the Trump's response, Trump administration's response is, let's do it again because we'll get a new headline. So, you know, just in the last 10 days, Trump ordered...

the Department of Homeland Security to block Harvard's participation of foreign students being admitted. The court blocked that. So Trump issued another order trying to do the exact same thing, which the court also blocked. So why in the world would Trump do that? He knew they would block it again. The answer is he wanted the headline. So that's the kind of short-term goal. Trump knows that he's a populist and he thinks it'll be popular with some of his followers at least to be fighting with Harvard. And Trump likes to scare people

uh elite institutions you know trump has two kinds of enemies that he likes to go after he likes to go after those with almost no resources the most vulnerable among us like undocumented people and then he likes to go after really high profile things like harvard or like big big law firms so you know you can see why trump likes the idea of frightening uh institutions that are identified with the elites which harvard is let's be honest about that so that's his short-term goal but in the longer term

Remember that Donald Trump is a guy who lost the race for the presidency in 2020 and then for the next four years never admitted he lost. In fact, he kept insisting that he'd won. So he's someone who has a really powerful reality distortion field.

And he wants to go after anyone in the society who has the guts and the institutional credibility to tell him, no, you're wrong. You're not telling the truth. And so he goes after media because independent media have the job of giving an independent reporting on what's true. And Trump doesn't like that. He's going after the courts because courts have the authority to exercise independent judgment.

And universities are the third really great target for him in this regard because universities are where there's independent research and independent fact-finding, not on the day-to-day way that media does it,

but rather in the longer-term way that academic research does it. And so Trump would like us to live in a country where what he says goes and his view of the world is what everyone accepts. And a university, especially a university like Harvard, poses a fundamental challenge to that goal. And that makes us dangerous to him. One last question, Professor Feldman. You know, among the justifications for Trump's war on Harvard is that Harvard hasn't done enough to combat anti-Semitism.

Now, even your president, President Garber, has acknowledged that Harvard needs to do more on this issue. So do you think any part of the president's motivation is justified here? Antisemitism is a real threat in the United States. Just in recent weeks,

We had a terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, in which nearly a dozen people were injured by Molotov cocktails. That was a real terrorist anti-Semitic incident. It's not the only one that's happened. So let me be really clear that I take anti-Semitism incredibly seriously. And I'm Jewish. And I don't want to be attacked by Molotov cocktails or subject to discrimination or any of that. But...

Trump is using anti-Semitism as an excuse to go after Harvard. And I don't think anyone on this campus, and I don't really think anyone in the country genuinely believes that that's why Trump is going after Harvard. And I don't think Trump thinks that that's the reason. You know, we have had plenty of pro-Palestine protests on Harvard's campus, but most of what got headlines finished a year ago, fully a year ago.

And the reality is that the university has taken meaningful steps to address the possibility of anti-Semitism on campus and also of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias. So anti-Semitism is real and it's scary, but it's not what Trump is actually going forward with here. And it's not justified as a basis for trying to ban funding on the Harvard campus. If I could, I'll just tell you a quick story.

story about this recently when the university got notices that research was being shut down a close friend of mine who's a very eminent physicist and

said to me very bitterly, he said, you know, we just got, my colleagues and I just got a letter saying that because of anti-Semitism, they're shutting down our theoretical physics project and all three of my co-leads on this project are all Jewish and so am I. And he said, you know, he actually said it's obscene that, you know, somehow the university is shutting down theoretical physics research

because of the Trump administration pulling the funding because of anti-Semitism. It's just such a preposterous suggestion and nobody believes it. All right, well that's Noah Feldman. He's the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and Chairman of the Harvard Society of Fellows. He's also the author of 10 books including his most recent, To Be a Jew Today: A New Guide to God, Israel, and the Jewish People. Noah Feldman, thank you for joining us today. We're very grateful. Thank you, Anthony.

Thanks for listening. Meghna is back tomorrow. I'm Anthony Brooks. This is On Point. Support for this podcast comes from It's Revolutionary, a podcast from Massachusetts 250. Listen on for the story of one drag king's self-expression, pride, and transformation in Northampton, Massachusetts. ♪

You're listening to It's Revolutionary, a podcast celebrating 250 years since the shot heard around the world was fired right here in Massachusetts. I'm Jay Feinstein. From revolution to revolution, we're exploring the people and places in Massachusetts that shape America.

Today we found ourselves in Northampton, Massachusetts, home of some pretty rad rainbow crosswalks. They're nothing small. They're pretty, it's a pretty chunky, very obvious rainbow.

That's Ross, better known as the drag king Victor Evangelica. I carry the spirit of Victor everywhere I go. He spreads the good word. I met up with him at the cafe T-Roots on Main Street, the city's main drag, to talk about how Northampton might be revolutionary as an oasis of queer life.

I want to make sure they know that they can bother us for food. Of course, after we ordered some delicious food. Oh, thank you so much. Oh, that looks so yummy. And he said revolutionary doesn't even begin to describe Northampton. You know, this is a place where Sojourner Truth lived, Frederick Douglass visited. There is a long history of people who have been critical to our culture,

understandings of the human experience and people's struggles that have found refuge in this area. Revolutionary War veteran Daniel Shays, best known for Shays' Rebellion, lived around this area too. And today, Northampton continues to be an oasis for artists, queer people, and anyone who might not have somewhere else to go. You know, it's a very zany population here, I'm very proud to say.

It's a place he feels he can really be himself. The queer joy and honestly like self-expression that I can have here is something that I genuinely feel it's some of the best in the world. This is like one of the best places in our world to be queer.

I think about that and I think about the struggles I still face and sometimes it's disheartening, but it's also, it brings me so much joy that there is such a resilient group of people around here who are very friendly, you know, want to help you. If you talk to somebody about confusing parking meters in this area, somebody's going to help you out. If you talk to somebody about where's this thing or that that's a local, they're probably going to know where to point you and what's the best place to eat.

And he's right, it was Victor's suggestion that brought me to T-Roots in the first place. But I was also in town to see Victor perform, where he dressed up in a costume made of wires and chains and Super Nintendo cartridges. One of the parts of the big reveal is I take off this like inhibiting jacket made out of wires and I shed these things and I'm able to move more freely throughout this number and

show people that act of transformation and freeing yourself from that kind of personal bind you might have. I mean, it just sounds like it gives you a level of joy. I'm just watching the smile on your face as you describe the character. Yeah, I kind of do a lot of 80s riffs that are nostalgic for me, just based off of what my parents were into a lot growing up. And that's really what makes me

feel the most at home I feel and is the easiest for me to fit into. It's a lot of fun. So that night we joined an eclectic crowd in an arcade called The Quarters to see some drag.

Before the show, we caught up with a few audience members. Yeah, what are you hoping to see tonight? Craziness, fun, queer love, joy, you know, that kind of thing. Most of the time, there's usually a drag show happening somewhere. So whether it's like here, a couple towns over, there's usually like some place to go to see it. I just love drag as an expression of...

like individuality and what people can do with their craft and their skills. It's fun to see how creative people get with it. I mean, the way people do their makeup and what they wear, it's amazing to see people just go up there and just be their authentic selves. And being authentic is what it's all about, says Victor. The best drag that people see is truly reflective of people who know themselves and understand

reflective of people who are so proud of the person that they are that they're able to go on stage and serve a fantasy.

And he sees drag like that and art like that all over the Northampton area. I think when you get people who can live as their authentic selves as an area, you get better art. You get people who are doing things for real. And I'm, you know, I really do think about it all the time. Like, I don't think there's anywhere else I could have lived my lived experience and do what I do besides Massachusetts. I'm turning my cell phone off.

It's Revolutionary is a podcast from MA250. For more stories, check out massachusetts250.org or wbur.org slash ma250. ♪