What distinguishes Harvard from UCLA in terms of resisting President Trump’s actions? It might hinge on Gavin Newsom’s ambitions for the White House.
Harvard has recently faced accusations of anti-Semitism alongside the president’s insistence on various policies many see as focused on inclusion and diversity—whatever “awakening” means in Trump’s context.
The esteemed university may be looking at a hefty settlement—reportedly around $500 million—to appease an administration that is increasingly controlling American institutions. Meanwhile, Trump has targeted UCLA by freezing over $500 million in federal grants and is demanding nearly $1 billion in payments.
“We will not participate in this kind of assault on academic freedom at our esteemed public institution,” Newsom stated recently, adding that they wouldn’t follow the lead of other schools that have taken a different stance.
I hope this is accurate.
By technicality, the University of California is overseen by a board, with Newsom as a member. Yet, it seems he’s only reappointed a select few voting members, and I find it hard to believe that the board won’t stand firm on how to defend UCLA, which is crucial for its future.
So, it seems the decision ultimately lies with the university—a nod to George W. Bush’s term “the decider.”
Choosing to back down could have dire implications, tarnishing the university’s image and possibly making California a less safe place.
While Harvard might have a lofty reputation, UCLA and the UC system wield substantial influence in reality. Over a million Californians have earned their UC degrees, with about 200,000 currently enrolled. Each year, UCLA contributes more than $2 billion to the local economy and enriches knowledge through unique research—benefits that are hard to measure with dollars alone.
“In terms of size and impact on the country, Harvard doesn’t compare,” noted Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco). “From a scientific and healthcare viewpoint, the UC system plays a critical role in fostering Silicon Valley innovation and the pharmaceutical industry—it’s much more relevant culturally and economically than any other institution.”
California’s interests are significant here. Private universities like Harvard might be able to weather financial issues better, but they don’t hold the same importance as UCLA, often referred to as the “People’s University,” as said by Zev Yaroslavsky, a former LA County Supervisor and current director at the UCLA Ruskin School of Public Relations.
“There’s a clear distinction between Harvard and UCLA, or UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, or Michigan,” he asserted.
The issue is quite serious. If the university decides to settle, it risks paying out a hefty sum, perhaps lessening Trump’s demands but still incurring costs that could hang over them for years. But at least they would have clarity on the matter.
If they choose not to settle, they might find themselves embroiled in lengthy and uncertain litigation.
Recently, a federal court allowed a lawsuit that could lead to the release of over $80 million in frozen funds. Yet, even that win puts the entire UC system in jeopardy against the president’s agenda, with no guarantees that California would come out on top if the case reaches the Supreme Court.
However, if UCLA does settle, what’s to stop Trump from making further demands next year? As Yaroslavsky pointed out, giving a bully lunch money just encourages them to come back for more.
“There’s always a tendency to negotiate and settle,” remarked state Sen. Wiener. “But I don’t view that as a viable option here.”
I might not be the business decision maker, but cutting back on financial compromise is often prudent. Still, some crucial matters must be addressed.
Education serves as a buffer against authoritarianism, and undermining it has long been a goal of the far right. It’s evident that educated, open-minded individuals generally favor diversity and democracy.
In 2021, Vice President J.D. Vance described universities as “the enemy” in a notable speech, which feels quite fitting.
“We need to fervently attack the universities across this nation,” he stated. And here we are.
If California—the world’s fourth-largest economy—can’t withstand this pressure, what institution will dare to challenge it?
“California must assert, ‘No, we will not let UC be controlled. We won’t fund these institutions as a cave to fear,’” Wiener emphasized. “If California fails to resist, it’s hard to imagine who will step up.”
Once again, California and its people are the last line of defense. It’s crucial for us to communicate to publicly funded universities that we expect them to resist these attacks, and that the governor should lead the charge.
Ultimately, this concern is significant, and it truly matters to all of us.
