{shortcode-3861f8cb5db457a679ce521279c8dc1b3bde2a58}
Harvard faculty cheered a federal judge’s Wednesday order that restored billions of dollars in federal funding to the University, but several warned that the legal fight is far from over.
United States District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs ruled that the Trump administration violated the Constitution by freezing $2.7 billion in federal funding to Harvard. Her order vacated the funding freezes and blocked the administration from reimposing unconstitutional conditions on the funding.
In the hours after the ruling was filed, faculty applauded the decision as proof that the University had been unlawfully targeted by the Trump administration — and as evidence that Harvard could continue weathering the White House’s attacks.
“It’s an important victory,” Government and Sociology professor Theda R. Skocpol said. “It’s very important because it shows that an institution led by powerful people, connected to major donors, and certainly not lacking in ambition, can stand up.”
Professors said they were especially glad that Burroughs had disputed the federal government’s claim that the funding cuts were a justified response to antisemitic incidents at Harvard. In her ruling, Burroughs wrote that there was “little connection between the research affected by the grant terminations and antisemitism.”
Still, faculty said the ruling would not be the final episode in Harvard’s protracted dispute with the White House. On Wednesday night, the Trump administration vowed to appeal Burroughs’ ruling, kickstarting a process that could escalate the case to the Supreme Court.
“I’m left with this sinking feeling that this is a kind of moral victory, but perhaps ultimately one that doesn’t really restore the University to where it should be,” Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Professor Peter R. Girguis said.
As the Trump administration prepares an appeal, the White House and Harvard can continue to negotiate an out of court settlement that would end the legal clash before higher courts have the chance to hear the case.
Rumors of an agreement have been circulating ever since the two parties restarted negotiations in June. For months now, the White House has been pushing hard for a settlement that could cost Harvard upwards of $500 million. Harvard Medical School professor Philip A. Cole said he thought Burroughs’ ruling could give the University a better bargaining position in those talks.
“More of a sense of urgency for reaching a settlement — I consider that positive,” Cole said.
Burroughs’ ruling also marks a significant victory for Harvard’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors, a faculty group who filed suit challenging the Trump administration’s cuts. The group’s suit was joined with the University’s in April.
History professor Kirsten A. Weld, the president of Harvard’s AAUP chapter, called the ruling “a huge win for academic freedom.”
“It’s a huge win for the whole higher education sector in the United States,” she said. “It shows that when researchers and academics stand up to fight back against blatantly unlawful government attacks, they can win.”
Classics professor Richard F. Thomas, a member of the Harvard AAUP’s executive committee, said he was “delighted” by the decision. He highlighted that many faculty testimonies included in the AAUP’s filings were cited by Burroughs in her decision.
“It was a real ray of sunlight that came through when I saw the news,” Thomas said. “I was particularly proud of the role played by the AAUP.”
Despite the victory in court, the funding cuts have already had severe impacts on Harvard’s research ecosystem, forcing researchers to shelve projects and fundamentally alter their lab operations. The disruption has been particularly acute for faculty working with living specimens who could no longer sustain those projects without vital federal dollars.
“Some people would be able to pick up exactly where they left off. But for folks with labs where people have been let go, or animals euthanized, it’s going to be a lot harder,” History of Science professor Naomi Oreskes wrote. “There’s going to be lasting damage.”
Christoph Lange, a School of Public Health professor who said he lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in frozen federal funds, also warned the funding cuts and hiring freezes will have lasting effects on recruitment into the medical field.
“People don’t know what the future will bring,” said Christoph Lange, a School of Public Health professor who has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in frozen federal funds. “Do they have a future in research? Do they have a future in academia?”
Correction: September 4, 2025
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated Harvard School of Public Health professor Christoph Lange’s projects lost hundreds of millions of dollars due to the federal funding freeze. In fact, Lange lost hundreds of thousands of dollars
—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.
—Staff writer Avani B. Rai can be reached at avani.rai@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @avaniiiirai.
