{shortcode-cb2105d43c3438b75183e0d0eb4f550f26636352}

BOSTON — A federal judge agreed to expedite Harvard’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over its attempt to freeze more than $2.2 billion in federal funding to the University on Monday.

Massachusetts District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs, a Barack Obama appointee who is presiding over the case, set a hearing for July 21 during a status conference at the John Joseph Moakley Courthouse in Boston.

The decision came after Harvard requested an expedited schedule for hearings in a Wednesday court filing and indicated it planned to seek a resolution through summary judgment, a decision issued without trial.

The University also declined on Wednesday to seek a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, which would have temporarily blocked the White House’s proposed funding freeze before Burroughs reached a decision in the case.

Burroughs set a June 2 deadline for the parties to move for summary judgment.

Harvard sued the Trump administration for demanding that the University accept sweeping concessions — including disciplining members of prominent pro-Palestine groups and eliminating all its diversity programming — or see billions in federal funding pulled. In its lawsuit filed last Monday, Harvard argued the move violated procedural requirements and represented an unconstitutional affront to its academic freedom.

“Under whatever name, the Government has ceased the flow of funds to Harvard as part of its pressure campaign to force Harvard to submit to the Government’s control over its academic programs. That, in itself, violates Harvard’s constitutional rights,” the lawsuit read.

The July 21 hearing date means that the freeze is likely to stretch into the summer.

Harvard’s arguments seem poised to hold up in court, multiple legal experts told The Crimson last week. One professor at the University of North Carolina’s law school called the Trump administration’s demands to Harvard “egregiously illegal.”

During the status conference on Monday, Burroughs agreed to a more detailed timeline for the case — including June 9 and June 23 deadlines for the plaintiffs and defendants, respectively, to submit amici briefs — which lawyers from both sides had agreed to.

Burroughs also said she wanted to keep the length and number of amici briefs filed on both sides of the case to a minimum. She proposed, and lawyers for both sides agreed to, a five-page limit for amici briefs. The lawyers also agreed to keep their own briefs under 80 pages.

Burroughs is not new to dealing with cases involving Harvard. In 2019, she ruled to uphold Harvard’s race-conscious admissions policies — a decision that was overturned by the Supreme Court years later.

And in 2020, she oversaw a case brought by Harvard and MIT that challenged the first Trump administration’s attempt to force all international students enrolled online in U.S. universities to leave the country. Immigration and Customs Enforcement rescinded its policy before Burroughs issued a ruling.

—Staff writer William C. Mao can be reached at william.mao@thecrimson.com. Follow him on X @williamcmao.

—Staff writer Veronica H. Paulus can be reached at veronica.paulus@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @VeronicaHPaulus.