Harvard towards an understanding with the White House: up to 500 million on the table to close the case on pro-Gaza protests
Harvard is in talks with the Trump administration over a possible settlement of up to $500 million, aimed at ending the dispute over pro-Gaza protests
2' min read
2' min read
Harvard University is reportedly ready to pay up to $500 million to settle a controversial dispute with the Trump administration related to the pro-Gaza protests that have rocked campuses in recent months. The New York Times reports this, citing four sources close to the ongoing negotiations between the university and the White House.
According to reports, the prestigious Massachusetts university is reluctant to make a direct payment to the federal government, but remains open to working out the exact financial terms of the deal. The amount demanded by the administration - more than double the 200 million paid by Columbia University last week in a similar out-of-court settlement - reflects Washington's increasing level of pressure against academic institutions, which are accused of failing to effectively counter incidents of anti-Semitism linked to pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
Harvard, like other elite American universities, has come into the crosshairs of the Department of Education for alleged civil rights violations. In particular, the White House is said to have explicitly asked Harvard for a 'far higher' sum than that accepted by Columbia, according to Donald Trump in private discussions.
Neither party, so far, has publicly clarified which specific allegations would be resolved through the settlement, nor what conditions might be imposed in return for the closure of the affair. One particularly sensitive point concerns the possible appointment of an external observer to oversee the implementation of the settlement - a measure already envisaged in the Columbia settlement - which Harvard considers potentially detrimental to its academic autonomy.
Despite their reservations, university leaders have long recognised that a negotiated solution could be a pragmatic option to avoid further tensions with the federal administration, especially in view of a possible second Trump term.

