GET THE APP
Friday, September 19, 2025

Category: Politics
June 4, 2025
Culture
Politics

Hegseth Directs Navy to Rename Ship Previously Honoring Harvey Milk.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the U.S. Navy to rename the oiler ship USNS Harvey Milk, originally named after gay rights activist Harvey Milk, who had a sexual relationship with a 16-year-old runaway boy while he was in his thirties.

👥 Who’s Involved: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and the late Harvey Milk.

📍 Where & When: The renaming order was issued at the start of Pride Month in June of 2025, affecting a ship named in 2016 during a San Francisco ceremony.

⚠️ Impact: The decision has sparked criticism from Democratic leaders, but draws attention to Milk’s controversial relationship with underage boy Jack Galen McKinley. 

IN FULL:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has directed the U.S. Navy to rename the USNS Harvey Milk, a ship named in honor of the late gay rights activist and politician. The order, issued at the start of Pride Month, was revealed through a memorandum issued by the Department of Defense (DoD).

The USNS Harvey Milk was named in 2016 during a ceremony in San Francisco. Milk, a Navy veteran, became the first openly gay elected official in California in 1977, serving on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors before being assassinated in 1978. However, Milk also had a sexual relationship with an underage runaway, Jack Galen McKinley, while he was in his thirties, which has led many conservatives to challenge the status he has been awarded as a civil rights hero.

This renaming initiative is reportedly part of Hegseth’s broader efforts to “reestablish the warrior culture” within the military. Since assuming his role, Hegseth has worked to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, aiming to restore what he refers to as the “warrior ethos.”

In addition to the USNS Harvey Milk, other ships on a Navy renaming recommendation list include the USNS Thurgood Marshall, USNS Ruth Bader Ginsburg, USNS Harriet Tubman, USNS Dolores Huerta, USNS Lucy Stone, USNS Cesar Chavez, and USNS Medgar Evers.

The decision has drawn sharp criticism from Democratic leaders. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) condemned the move, stating, “The reported decision by the Trump Administration to change the names of the USNS Harvey Milk and other ships in the John Lewis-class is a shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) also expressed outrage, calling the renaming “disgusting, blatant discrimination—and during Pride Month to boot.” He added that Milk “served the U.S. Navy and his country honorably, and he was assassinated while serving the public and fighting for LGBTQ+ rights.”

Schumer did not reference Milk’s unlawful relations with McKinley.

Jack Montgomery contributed to this report.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
June 3, 2025
William Upton
Politics

MTG Under Fire for Admitting She Voted for the Big, Beautiful Bill Without Reading It.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) admitted she did not read President Donald J. Trump’s budget reconciliation bill before voting for it and would have opposed it had she known about an AI-related provision. The Georgia Republican also appears not to understand the purpose of the ban on state-level AI regulation, a provision likely intended to prevent Democrat state lawmakers in California from setting regulatory standards for the whole country.

👥 Who’s Involved: Marjorie Taylor Greene, President Trump, national Democratic lawmakers, including Eric Swalwell, Ted Lieu, Mark Pocan, Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA), and the California state legislature.

📍 Where & When: U.S. House of Representatives; Greene’s admission was posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday, June 3, 2025.

💬 Key Quote: “Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years,” Greene wrote on X.

⚠️ Impact: Critics contend that the AI provision would block states from regulating AI systems for a decade, potentially nullifying existing state laws. However, Greene also seems unaware that the provision is actually an assertion of federal authority over AI regulation, meant to effectively prevent far-left state-level Democrats in California from dictating AI regulatory policy for the whole country.

IN FULL:

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has acknowledged that she did not thoroughly read President Donald J. Trump‘s tax and spending bill, dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB), before voting in favor of it. Greene admitted she was unaware of a provision in the bill that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence (AI) systems for 10 years.

Posting on X, Greene wrote, “Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.”

The AI provision, added just two days before the markup, would prohibit state and local governments from enacting laws or regulations targeting AI models, facial recognition systems, and other automated decision tools. While critics make over-the-top claims that the provision removes safeguards or is an infringement on state rights, the section appears more aimed at preventing California from setting AI regulatory standards for the entire country.

Most technology companies working on AI development are either located in California or have a nexus to the state, meaning far-left Democrats in Sacramento can enact regulation directly on most of the industry. Additionally, as has happened with other industries, when California passes sweeping regulatory standards, companies in that sector will often change their policies nationwide to comply with California law rather than creating policies and adjusting consumer or user experiences for Californians alone. Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) has already signed several new laws regulating AI.

Under the former Biden government, the lack of federal intervention allowed California to set emissions standards for the automotive industry and regulations on electric vehicles. The provision that Greene didn’t read in Trump’s budget reconciliation bill would prevent the very situation that the Trump White House had to correct by intervening against California on emissions standards.

Notably, Democratic lawmakers, who unanimously opposed the bill, responded sharply to Greene’s admission. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) posted, “You have one job. To. Read. The. F***ing. Bill.” Similarly, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) noted that he had read the provision and cited it as a reason for his opposition, advising, “PRO TIP: It’s helpful to read stuff before voting on it.”

As it is currently written, the AI provision is unlikely to survive the Byrd Rule in the U.S. Senate, though some lawmakers say they are working to alter the section to be Byrd Rule compliant.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
June 3, 2025
News
Politics

The Dutch Govt Has Collapsed Over Migration. Here’s Why…

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Geert Wilders, leader of the populist Freedom Party (PVV), withdrew his party from the governing coalition in the Netherlands, collapsing the government.

👥 Who’s Involved: Geert Wilders (PVV), Prime Minister Dick Schoof, center-right VVD leader Dilan Yesilgoz, Deputy Prime Minister Mona Keijzer of the  Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB).

📍 Where & When: Netherlands, coalition collapsed after less than a year in office, starting July 2024.

💬 Key Quote: “No signature for our asylum plans. PVV leaves the coalition,” said Geert Wilders on X.

⚠️ Impact: Snap elections are expected, with asylum and immigration likely to dominate campaigns.

IN FULL:

The Dutch governing coalition has collapsed after populist leader Geert Wilders withdrew his Freedom Party (PVV) over disagreements on immigration policy. The coalition, which had been in power for less than a year, fell apart following Wilders’ demand for stricter asylum measures, including freezing applications and limiting chain migration, a.k.a “family reunification.”

Prime Minister Dick Schoof reportedly made a last-minute appeal to coalition leaders on Tuesday morning, but the meeting ended after just one minute when Wilders walked out. Wilders later posted on X, “No signature for our asylum plans. PVV leaves the coalition.”

The coalition, formed in July 2024 after lengthy negotiations, included Wilders’ PVV, the notionally conservative but largely liberal VVD, the upstart Farmers‘ Citizen Movement (BBB), and the marginally center-right New Social Contract.

VVD leader Dilan Yesilgoz called Wilders’s decision “super irresponsible,” while Deputy Prime Minister Mona Keijzer of the BBB accused Wilders of “betraying the Netherlands.” However, with PVV being the most successful party in the last Dutch election, many will argue it was incumbent on Wilders’s coalition partners to defer to him on his key issues of asylum and immigration.

The fallout has sparked speculation about snap elections, which could occur this autumn. Analysts suggest that Wilders will likely center his campaign on immigration issues. Wilders and the PVV came first in last year’s national elections, and polling suggests that the PVV remains ahead.

Prime Minister Schoof is expected to offer the cabinet’s resignation to King Willem-Alexander. While Schoof could attempt to lead a minority government, forming alliances with left-wing opposition parties is seen as unlikely. Leftist Labour-Green alliance leader Frans Timmermans, a former top European Union (EU) official, has already called for fresh elections.

Image by Roel Wijnants.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
June 2, 2025
News
Politics

DATA: Trump-Era GOP Set to Overtake Democrats as ‘Party of the Middle Class.’

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Polling by CNN revealed the Republican and Democratic parties are now nearly tied in being seen as the “party of the middle class.”

👥 Who’s Involved: The poll surveyed 2,028 American adults and was conducted by SSRS for CNN.

📍 Where & When: Conducted between May 5 and May 26, 2023, across the United States.

💬 Key Quote: CNN’s Harry Enten stated, “This, I think, speaks to Democratic ills more than anything else. They have traditionally been the party of the middle class. No more.”

⚠️ Impact: The Democratic Party’s historic lead in this area has narrowed significantly, with more Americans now associating the Republican Party with leadership, change, and effectiveness under President Donald J. Trump.

IN FULL:

A new poll shows that Americans increasingly see the Republicans under President Donald J. Trump as best representing the middle class. The survey, conducted between May 5 and May 26, found that 34 percent of respondents identified the Democratic Party as the “party of the middle class,” while 32 percent said the same of the Republican Party. The poll surveyed 2,028 U.S. adults and has a margin of error of 2.7 percent.

The findings reveal a dramatic shift from past decades. In 1989, the Democratic Party held a 23-point lead over Republicans in being seen as the party of the middle class. CNN Analyst Harry Enten commented on the results, saying, “This, I think, speaks to Democratic ills more than anything else. They have traditionally been the party of the middle class. No more. Donald Trump and the Republican Party have taken that mantle away.”

The poll also highlighted Americans’ broader perceptions of the two major parties. Forty percent of respondents said the Republican Party is the party of “strong leaders,” compared to just 16 percent who said the same for the Democrats. When asked which party represents “change,” 32 percent pointed to the GOP, while 25 percent chose the Democrats. On the question of which party “can get things done,” 36 percent favored the Republicans, compared to 19 percent for the Democrats.

President Trump and the MAGA movement have shifted U.S. politics significantly, with traditional Democrat groups like Latinos voting more and more for Trump and Trump-backed candidates. Florida’s Miami-Dade, once a bastion of Democratic support, is now majority Republican, largely thanks to shifting voting patterns among Latinos.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
June 2, 2025
Christopher Tomlinson
Politics

This Democrat Senator Thinks Trump is Right on the Middle East.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: U.S. Senator John Fetterman has broken ranks with fellow Democrats, praising President Donald J. Trump for scrapping the old Iran nuclear deal.

👤Who’s Involved: Senator John Fetterman (D-PA), President Donald J. Trump, Democrats, Iran.

🧾Key Quote: “I really do think, now, Trump did the right thing to break that agreement,” said Senator Fetterman.

📌Significance: Fetterman continues to rebuff Democrats on Middle East issues, particularly emphasising his pro-Israel stance amid a massive wave of pro-Palestine activism among the left.

IN FULL:

Democrat Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) has praised President Donald J. Trump’s Middle East policies, saying the Republican president was right to scrap the Obama-Biden Iran deal and push for a new agreement placing greater restrictions on the Islamist nation’s ability to enrich uranium. Notably, Fetterman’s comments put him at odds with most of his fellow Democrats, a fact he openly admits.

“I wasn’t really allowed to disagree, politically, with the original agreement on Iran,” Fetterman said during a panel discussion alongside Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA) on June 2. “I really do think, now, Trump did the right thing to break that agreement,” he added.

President Trump scrapped the Iran nuclear deal and re-imposed sanctions on the Islamic Republic during his first term in office. Known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Iran deal was seen by critics as overly weak on enforcement and would likely do little to prevent the country from developing a nuclear weapons program. While former President Joe Biden did not entirely reinstate he agreement, his government lifted sanctions on Iran and essentially allowed its nuclear program to continue unabated.

After retaking the White House in 2024, President Trump announced he would be reinstating maximum pressure on Iran with aggressive sanctions aimed at the country’s oil industry. However, Trump has also been clear that he would seek a new agreement with Iran to end its nuclear weapons development and subject the country to stringent International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight. In March, President Trump told the Iranians they must negotiate a new nuclear deal with the United States or face consequences. “The other alternative [to negotiations] is we have to do something,” he said, suggesting the possibility of U.S.-backed strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Senator Fetterman’s comments are not unusual for him, as he has taken a pro-Israel stance since the October 7 massacres by the terrorist group Hamas, which provoked the current conflict in Gaza. Fetterman has also backed, at least in part, Trump’s efforts to reshore American jobs and was the first Democrat to meet with the America First leader following the 2024 election.

Following the January meeting at Mar-a-Lago, Trump called Fetterman “fascinating” and said, “He’s a commonsense person. He’s not liberal or conservative. He’s just a commonsense person, which is beautiful.”

Fetterman is not the only figure on the left to praise Trump’s policies. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the former far-left presidential candidate, surprisingly praised the Trump administration’s border policies.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
May 30, 2025
Immigration
Politics

DHS Cracks Down on 500 Sanctuary Cities for Impeding Deportation Efforts.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a list of 500 sanctuary jurisdictions it says are obstructing federal immigration enforcement.

👥 Who’s Involved: DHS, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the Trump administration, sanctuary cities, counties, and states.

📍 Where & When: Across the U.S.; list released Thursday, May 29, 2025.

💬 Key Quote: “These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens,” said DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.

⚠️ Impact: DHS claims sanctuary policies endanger communities and law enforcement while protecting illegal immigrants accused of criminal activity.

IN FULL:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has released a list of 500 sanctuary jurisdictions it accuses of obstructing federal immigration enforcement efforts under the Trump administration. The list, published Thursday on the department’s website, includes cities, counties, and states across the United States.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem criticized sanctuary city policies, stating, “These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens.” The DHS alleges that such jurisdictions shield individuals in the country illegally from federal immigration authorities, creating risks for both communities and law enforcement.

The department explained that the list was compiled based on several factors, including whether jurisdictions identify themselves as sanctuary areas, their compliance level with federal immigration enforcement, restrictions on sharing information with immigration authorities, and legal protections for illegal immigrants.

“Sanctuary jurisdictions including cities, counties, and states that are deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endanger American communities,” the DHS statement read.

This move by the DHS comes amid increased pressure from the Trump administration on local governments to align with federal immigration law enforcement. While law enforcement in Republican governed states are increasingly complying with President Donald J. Trump’s mass deportation efforts, Democrat-controlled states continue to by-and-large resist immigration enforcement efforts.

The DHS claims that sanctuary policies allow individuals accused of criminal activity to avoid facing legal consequences, putting public safety at risk. Critics of sanctuary policies argue that they undermine the rule of law and prioritize the protection of illegal immigrants over the safety of citizens.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
May 29, 2025
William Upton
Politics

Trump Replacing DEI With ‘Merit-Based’ Hiring.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: The Trump administration is rolling out its Merit Hiring Plan for federal agencies, releasing new guidance on Thursday that replaces decades of DEI-style polices with one that focuses on applicants’ skills rather than their race or gender.

👥 Who’s Involved: President Donald J. Trump, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), federal agencies, federal hiring managers, and federal job applicants.

📍 Where & When: The policy was released on Thursday through guidance issued to agencies across the federal government.

⚠️ Impact: President Trump’s Merit Hiring Plan marks a significant shift in federal employment practices that will now focus on bringing high-skilled individuals for critical roles. The plan also ends race and gender based hiring practices that critics contend created discriminatory political constituencies inside the government workforce.

IN FULL:

President Donald J. Trump‘s administration is set to unveil a new federal employment policy focused on merit-based hiring instead of the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements that have dominated government employment for decades. The new hiring guidance, released to federal agencies on Thursday by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), is believed to bar the consideration of race and gender in employment decisions.

Based on legislation adopted last year in Congress, and ushered through by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, the Merit Hiring Plan provides guidance for federal hiring and instructs agencies to consider relevant skills beyond just resume experience. Notably, this provision has long been pushed by conservative education activists and technology industry figures who contend that college education requirements lock out too many qualified individuals from the professional workforce.

Skill-based hiring evaluations will be made through interviews and relevant testing of applicants, though resumes and professional experience will still be considered determining factors in hiring decisions.

Additionally, federal agencies are being directed to continue collecting workforce demographic data. However, this data will no longer be released publicly and will merely be retained by the federal government to ensure its policies promote a workforce with diverse skills and professional qualifications.

Another significant change comes through guidance meant to speed up federal hiring processes. Federal interviewers will now ask applicants a more standardized set of questions rather than the previous more ad-hoc process. This is aimed at ensuring federal hirings take no longer than 80 days.

Once implemented, the federal government is expected to begin a more modest hiring period to restaff certain agencies. After being inaugurated in January, President Trump and his White House dismissed upwards of 140,000 federal workers through force reduction or employment buyouts. The Trump administration has indicated it could soon move forward with the dismissal of another 150,000 federal employees, while also bringing in new individuals to fill critical roles.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
May 29, 2025
Politics

Is Congress About to Start Codifying the DOGE Cuts?

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: The White House plans to send a rescission package to Congress, targeting DOGE cuts and other spending reductions.

👥 Who’s Involved: Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and Congress.

📍 Where & When: Vought announced the rescission package on Wednesday, May 28, 2025.

💬 Key Quote: “We are doing everything we can to make the DOGE cuts permanent, either through rescissions or through impoundment.” – Russ Vought, OMB Director.

⚠️ Impact: The cuts will target areas such as foreign aid and funding for NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The process of filing additional cuts to be codified is expected to unfold over several months.

IN FULL:

President Donald J. Trump‘s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought confirmed late Wednesday the White House’s plans to send a rescission package to Congress to claw back spending appropriated under the former Biden government. During a television interview on Wednesday, Vought confirmed that the spending clawbacks will include cuts recommended by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and will be sent early next week when the House of Representatives returns to session.

The package, according to Vought, will focus on eliminating wasteful spending in areas such as foreign aid, appropriations earmarked for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and funding for NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Vought noted that this is just the beginning of a broader effort, saying, “We want to make sure that Congress passes its first rescissions bill, including the DOGE, and we will send more if they pass it.”

Vought emphasized that these cuts will not be included in a single comprehensive bill but will instead be addressed through a process spanning several months. Notably, rescission measures in the U.S. Senate are considered privileged and not subject to the filibuster. This means that only a simple majority of both houses of Congress is needed to pass the spending clawback.

According to the OMB Director, the cuts align with the fiscal year 2026 budget and include $160 billion in nondefense spending reductions. He stated that this is the lowest level of nondefense spending since fiscal year 2017 and, when adjusted for inflation, the lowest since 2000.

Vought also mentioned that the administration is exploring all available tools, including impoundment, to make the cuts permanent. “We are doing everything we can to make the DOGE cuts permanent, either through rescissions or through impoundment,” he said.

The rescission effort aims to ensure fiscal responsibility while addressing what the administration views as unnecessary and harmful expenditures. However, Vought acknowledged that the process would take time, adding, “It’s not going to be something that, hey, we’re going to have it in one bill, it’s going to be part of a process over the next several months.”

Image by Gage Skidmore.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
May 29, 2025
Politics

Data: Corporate DEI Roles Declining Amid Trump Admin Pressure.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: A recent study reveals a 13 percent reduction in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) jobs in the U.S., with 2,600 positions eliminated.

👥 Who’s Involved: Revelio Labs conducted the analysis; President Donald J. Trump and his Department of Justice (DOJ) are pushing back against DEI practices.

📍 Where & When: The data covers the growth and now accelerating decline of DEI jobs since 2016.

💬 Key Quote: “I’m hopeful and encouraged that Harmeet will drop the hammer on these companies,” says Will Hild, Executive Director of Consumers’ Research, referring to Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the civil rights division at the DOJ.

⚠️ Impact: While DEI job numbers remain above 2016 levels, they are rapidly falling from their peak. This suggests that Trump’s White House efforts to crack down on discriminatory DEI policies are working and reversing the course of corporate policies.

IN FULL:

A new analysis by Revelio Labs reveals a significant decline in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) roles across the United States, with 2,600 positions eliminated since 2023. This marks a 13 percent reduction, bringing the total number of DEI-related jobs to approximately 17,700 as of January 2025, down from a peak of 20,000 in 2023.

The report highlights a dramatic shift from the rapid growth seen in recent years. Job postings for DEI roles surged by 595 percent in August 2022 compared to 2020. Positions tied to terms like “belonging,” “social impact,” or “culture” are also reportedly in decline.

This comes as major corporations scale back DEI programs and reduce financial support for Pride events, following a crackdown on what the Trump administration has termed illegal DEI practices. President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order in January 2025 aimed at eliminating identity-based employment considerations and restoring merit-based opportunities. Among the corporations to comply, at least in part, are Target, Deloitte, Lockheed Martin, and Verizon.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is expected to release further guidance soon, including recommendations for the private sector and a list of ongoing compliance investigations. Additionally, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, led by Harmeet Dhillon, has named investigating race-based employment discrimination as a top priority.

Observers have raised concerns about the potential rebranding of DEI roles within corporate structures. Will Hild, Executive Director of Consumers’ Research, warns, “If they just relabel DEI to be some department of HR, it’s not going to do any good.” Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that the human resources sector employed 922,000 people in 2024, up from 631,000 in 2016.

The analysis also revealed demographic trends within the DEI workforce. Women comprised more than 71 percent of DEI professionals from 2020 to 2024, compared to 51 percent in other roles. Additionally, Black and Hispanic workers accounted for 33 percent of DEI positions, compared to 21 percent of other roles. “That’s a tacit admission that they were engaging in race- and sex-based discrimination,” Hild commented, adding: “I’m hopeful and encouraged that Harmeet will drop the hammer on these companies.”

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
May 28, 2025
William Upton
Education
Politics

Trump: ‘Harvard… They’re Getting Their Ass Kicked.’

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: President Donald J. Trump says “Harvard wants to fight” his administration, but is losing badly, and must hand over the names of its foreign students if it wants to deescalate tensions with the White House.

👤Who’s Involved: President Trump, Harvard University, the Department of Homeland Security, and foreign students enrolled under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP).

🧾Key Quote: “Harvard wants to fight. They want to show how smart they are, and they’re getting their ass kicked,” Trump said.

⚠️Fallout: The administration has frozen $3 billion in federal funding, moved to strip Harvard of its SEVP certification, and blocked new foreign visa appointments—threatening to cost the university hundreds of millions in tuition revenue.

📌Significance: Trump’s hard line against Harvard signals a broader crackdown on elite institutions accused of harboring antisemitism and evading federal oversight, while putting foreign student programs under unprecedented scrutiny.

IN FULL:

President Donald J. Trump is stipulating that Harvard University must hand over the names of its foreign students if it wants to rachet down its conflict with the White House. Speaking in the Oval Office on Wednesday, the America First leader emphasized that “Harvard wants to fight” and that his administration is ready to continue increasing pressure on the university to comply with federal directives on antisemitism and foreign student visa vetting.

“So, we have to look at the list, and Harvard has to understand, the last thing I want to do is hurt them. They’re hurting themselves,” President Trump said, referring to his administration’s requests for the university to enact reforms and crack down on anti-Semitic activists and demonstrations on campus. “Harvard wants to fight. They want to show how smart they are, and they’re getting their ass kicked.”

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has suspended an estimated $3 billion in federal funding for Harvard, tied to concerns it is failing to tackle anti-Semitism and discriminating against white and Asian applicants in favour of less qualified applicants from other groups.

Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has moved to revoke the university’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. Around 27 percent of Harvard’s total enrolled student population is foreign, at just under 7,000. With the total cost for a foreign student to attend the Ivy League university estimated to be over $100,000 per year, the loss of those students could be a crippling financial blow to Harvard, in the hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

An Obama-appointed judge blocked this specific move, but the administration subsequently suspended the importation of foreign students generally, until new social media vetting processes are established.

While Harvard has tried to appear defiant to Trump’s White House directives in public, it is widely reported that the university’s administration is privately panicking over the reputational damage and financial burden the school is facing. Harvard is currently engaged in several ongoing lawsuits against the Trump administration.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more