Trump Administration Investigates Harvard, Law Review Over Alleged Racial Discrimination

The Trump administration has fired up investigations into Harvard University and the Harvard Law Review, following claims that the journal discriminated against readers—specifically White men—who wanted to respond to an article on police reform. Both the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are now poking around potential violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federally funded educational programs.

According to HHS, an editor at the Harvard Law Review called it "concerning" that most respondents to a police reform article were White men. Another editor reportedly suggested a faster review for a submission simply because the author was a minority. If you’re thinking that sounds like a reality show plot twist, you’re not alone.

HHS Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Craig Trainor, didn’t hold back: he accused the Harvard Law Review of running an admissions process where race can matter as much—or more—than the merit of the work. He made it clear, "No institution—no matter its pedigree, prestige, or wealth—is above the law." If violations are found, Harvard could lose its precious federal funding. That’s a lot of scholarship money potentially going poof.

Harvard Law School responded by saying it takes compliance seriously and will investigate any credible violations. On a side note, they highlighted that the Law Review is a student-run organization, legally separate from the law school itself. Also, a similar claim was dismissed by a federal court back in 2018. Harvard definitely isn’t new to this dance.

This isn’t just about the Law Review. The Trump administration has ramped up its feud with elite universities, recently announcing a freeze on over $2 billion in federal funding for Harvard, with another $1 billion possibly on the chopping block. Why? Harvard refused to meet administration demands—including some that the university’s president, Alan M. Garber, called unconstitutional. These requests ranged from auditing campus viewpoints to completely dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Garber drew the line, saying these demands went beyond tackling antisemitism and amounted to government overreach into the university’s intellectual life. Harvard’s stance is firm—they’re not budging. Meanwhile, the administration’s Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism is pushing for real change, warning that elite universities need to get serious about these issues if they want to keep their taxpayer-funded perks.

One thing’s for sure: the saga between the Trump administration and Ivy League giants is far from over. Who knew academic journals could be this dramatic?