Court rules Trump-era funding freeze illegal: Why researchers at Harvard are still waiting for payments
Federal agencies have begun notifying Harvard researchers about the reinstatement of research funding that was frozen during the Trump administration. This freeze, which affected approximately $2.7 billion in grants and contracts, was halted following a federal judge’s ruling that deemed the freeze unlawful.Despite the court decision, researchers at Harvard remain without actual payments. A spokesperson for Harvard confirmed on Wednesday evening that notices of reinstatement have been sent by several federal agencies, but funds have not yet been disbursed, according to the Harvard Crimson.Federal agencies begin reinstatement process but payments have yet to arriveThe funding freeze was originally imposed in the spring under the Trump administration, which cited concerns over campus antisemitism as justification. However, Judge Allison D. Burroughs ruled last week that this reasoning was a “smokescreen” and that the administration’s actions were retaliatory and unlawful.Harvard’s spokesperson stated, “Harvard has begun to receive notices of reinstatements on many of the previously terminated federal awards from a range of federal agencies. So far, payments have not been restored on these awards,” as reported by the Harvard Crimson.While the reinstatement notices mark progress, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — the largest source of federal funding for Harvard, accounting for around 70% of federal grants — has not yet released any payments since the ruling. A person familiar with the matter confirmed this information.Delays continue despite court ruling and funding noticesAn email obtained by the Harvard Crimson, sent to researchers at the School of Public Health (HSPH), the Harvard school most dependent on federal grants, highlighted ongoing concerns. Kate Calvin, Executive Dean of Administration at HSPH, wrote, “Given that we are still not receiving payments, please continue to follow the bridging plans that have been established in partnership with your departments.”The White House and the nine federal agencies involved in the funding freeze did not respond immediately to requests for comment on their plans to resume payments fully.Legal ruling prevents future unconstitutional funding conditionsJudge Burroughs’ decision enjoined the government from enforcing the freeze orders and funding termination notices. Additionally, she granted Harvard a permanent injunction preventing the reimposition of unconstitutional conditions on its federal funding.This legal victory is expected to allow researchers and faculty at Harvard to resume projects and revive laboratories that had been shuttered due to the funding freeze. However, the timeline for when payments will resume remains unclear.Trump administration vows to appeal rulingWithin hours of the ruling, the Trump administration announced its intention to appeal. Despite this, no formal appeal has yet been filed, and in the absence of appellate court intervention, federal agencies are legally required to process the previously halted funds.According to the Harvard Crimson, this recent move to begin restoring funding is not Harvard’s first encounter with federal agencies’ reinstatements. In July, the NIH started allocating some grants to Harvard in compliance with a court order. However, officials from the Department of Government Efficiency, a cost-cutting government group, reportedly used their control over the NIH’s grant disbursal system to block funds until a settlement with the White House was reached.Payments remain pending as researchers await funding flowWhile federal agencies have begun the procedural step of notifying researchers about the reinstatement of funds, actual payments are yet to reach Harvard’s labs and departments. The delay continues to impact ongoing research, with many awaiting the resumption of financial support that was abruptly stopped months ago.The situation remains dynamic, with researchers and staff at Harvard closely monitoring federal actions following the court’s ruling and the administration’s response.
