Law Firms and Universities

Updated2026-11-08 Covers2025-01-29 to 2026-11-05

Summary

Starting in February 2025, Trump issued a memorandum and then executive orders (EOs) against several large law firms. A memorandum is a written instruction from the President. An executive order is a written order from the President to the agencies he runs; it is not a law passed by Congress. These orders suspended the firms’ lawyers’ security clearances, limited their access to federal buildings and ordered reviews of their government contracts.⁴⁵,¹ Nine firms reached agreements with the administration. Together they promised a total of $940 million in pro bono (free) legal work. The four firms that sued won rulings holding their orders unconstitutional. The American Bar Association (ABA) sued over the policy as a whole, and a judge refused the government’s request to dismiss that suit.²,³,⁴⁸,⁷⁸ The administration also froze federal grants to universities and opened civil-rights investigations. It set policy changes and payments as conditions for restoring the funds.⁴,⁵,⁵² Columbia, Brown, Cornell and Northwestern agreed to payments and had their funding restored. Penn, the University of Virginia (UVA) and UNC–Chapel Hill signed agreements without payment. Harvard and the University of California sued and won rulings in their favor.⁶,⁷,⁶¹,⁸,⁹ As of November 8, 2026, the government’s appeals in the law-firm cases and the Harvard case are undecided. The signed agreements remain in place.³,⁹⁸

Background

The law-firm actions used three powers of the executive branch: security clearances, access to federal buildings, and federal contracts.¹ The first executive order, EO 14230, cited Perkins Coie’s work for Hillary Clinton, including the Steele dossier. It also cited the firm’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. Later orders named other firms whose lawyers had represented Trump’s opponents.¹

The university actions were issued as enforcement against antisemitism. EO 14188 (Jan 29, 2025) and a federal Task Force to Combat Antisemitism (Feb 3) became the framework for the funding actions.¹⁰,¹¹ The main law the administration used was Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d)³⁹. It says programs that receive federal money may not discriminate.⁵ Under Title VI’s enforcement section (42 U.S.C. § 2000d-1)⁴⁰, funding may be cut off only after notice, a hearing and a report to Congress.¹²

What happened

Law-firm orders and agreements

On Feb 25, 2025 a presidential memorandum told agencies to suspend the clearances of Peter Koski and of Covington lawyers who had helped Smith. It told agencies to end their work with Covington where the law permits and to review the firm’s contracts. It cited “the weaponization of the judicial process.” It does not appear in the Federal Register’s database of presidential documents.⁴⁵ EO 14230 (Mar 6) suspended clearances for Perkins Coie staff and limited the firm’s access to federal buildings. It ordered reviews of the firm’s contracts. It told agencies not to hire the firm’s employees unless a waiver was granted.¹ It also told the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to review hiring at large firms under Title VII (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2)⁶², the federal law that bans job discrimination. On Mar 17 Acting Chair Andrea Lucas sent 20 firms demands for diversity data. The demands included personal information on law-student applicants. Students sued in Doe v. EEOC. Judge Reggie Walton dismissed that suit on Feb 9, 2026. The dismissal rested on an agreement between the two sides that repeated the EEOC’s statement that the letters were voluntary.⁴⁶,⁷⁷

EO 14237 (Mar 14) imposed similar measures on Paul Weiss. Paul Weiss became the first firm to reach an agreement, promising $40M in pro bono work for causes Trump favors. EO 14244 (Mar 21) revoked the order. It recited the firm’s commitment to “political neutrality with respect to client selection and attorney hiring.”¹³,⁵⁰,⁷¹ EO 14246 (Mar 25) targeted Jenner & Block. It cited the firm’s former partner Andrew Weissmann of the Mueller team. It accused the firm of backing “the obstruction of efforts to prevent illegal aliens from committing horrific crimes.” It also accused the firm of supporting “attacks against women and children based on a refusal to accept the biological reality of sex”; Jenner sued Mar 28.³³ EO 14250 (Mar 27) targeted WilmerHale, the firm associated with Robert Mueller’s special-counsel team.¹⁴ On Mar 28 Skadden promised $100M in an agreement made in place of an order. Willkie Farr struck a $100M deal on Apr 1, and by Apr 10 Milbank had pledged up to $100M. On Apr 8 Trump said the firms had given over $340 million in commitments. He called them “damages.”¹⁵,¹⁶ EO 14263 (Apr 9) targeted Susman Godfrey. That firm had represented Dominion in the lawsuit that ended in Dominion’s $787M settlement with Fox. The order said the firm “spearheads efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections.”³⁴ On Apr 11 five more firms reached agreements: Latham & Watkins, Kirkland & Ellis, A&O Shearman and Simpson Thacher ($125M each) and Cadwalader ($100M). That brought the total to $940M from nine firms.²

Law-firm litigation

Four firms sued. In the Perkins Coie case the government asked on Mar 21, 2025 to remove the presiding judge,⁶⁹ and the court said no on Mar 26.⁵¹,⁷⁰ On May 2 that judge permanently blocked the order. The judge held that EO 14230 “is unlawful, null and void in its entirety.”³ Judge John Bates of the federal trial court in Washington, D.C. (D.D.C.) ruled for Jenner & Block without a trial on May 23. This is called summary judgment. He declared EO 14246 “null and void.” He held that it broke the First Amendment³⁸, which protects free speech, and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.³³,⁷⁴ On May 27 Judge Richard Leon struck down the WilmerHale order “in its entirety as unconstitutional.” On Jun 27 Judge Loren AliKhan (D.D.C.) granted Susman Godfrey summary judgment on 8 of 10 counts. She also issued a permanent injunction, a court order that stops something for good.⁴⁹,¹⁴,⁷⁵ The government appealed each ruling. It filed its notice of appeal in Susman Godfrey on Aug 22, 2025,⁹³ and the D.C. Circuit, the federal appeals court in Washington, combined the four appeals on Feb 6, 2026.⁴⁹,⁷⁶ The Justice Department (DOJ) asked to drop the appeals and then changed course. The court let it withdraw that request on Mar 16, 2026.⁴⁹,²⁹ The appeals were argued on May 14, 2026 (Judges Sri Srinivasan and Neomi Rao were on the panel). DOJ’s Abhishek Kambli argued that courts cannot review clearance revocations “even if it is for improper motives,” while Paul Clement spoke for the firms. Clement argued that the orders “strike at the heart of the First Amendment.”⁴⁹,³

Lawyers who sue the government

A Mar 22, 2025 presidential memorandum gave orders to the Attorney General and the Homeland Security Secretary. They were to “seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who engage in frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation,” the memo said. It cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11⁶³, the court rule that lets judges punish lawyers for baseless filings. The memo also told them to refer lawyers for discipline and to consider reviewing the lawyers’ clearances or federal contracts. It ordered a review of eight years of lawyers’ conduct in lawsuits against the government.⁴⁷ On May 9 Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche barred the government, with limited exceptions, from hiring outside lawyers from firms in “active litigation against Administration policies” (Just Security’s summary).⁴⁷,⁷³ A separate Mar 22 memorandum revoked named people’s clearances. They included Mark Zaid, lawyer for the whistleblower whose complaint came before Trump’s first impeachment.⁷² On Dec 23, 2025 Judge Amir Ali (D.D.C.) blocked that memo as likely unconstitutional retribution. He rejected DOJ’s “political question” argument, which said courts should leave the matter to the President: “These are not political questions; they are legal ones.”⁴⁷,³⁷

The organized bar

On Apr 9, 2025 a Blanche memo barred DOJ lawyers from attending ABA events on official time. It cited the ABA’s suit over the foreign-aid freeze and positions “contrary to the federal government’s policies.” On Apr 10 DOJ ended the ABA’s five Office on Violence Against Women grants ($3.2M). Those grants had paid for legal help for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault since 1995.³⁵ On May 14 Judge Christopher Cooper (D.D.C.) blocked the terminations as likely First Amendment retaliation, meaning punishment for protected speech. He ordered the remaining ~$2M paid.³⁵ On Jun 16 the ABA sued over what it calls a “Law Firm Intimidation Policy,” made up of the orders, memoranda and statements taken together. The ABA alleges that this policy is meant to discourage lawyers from challenging the administration. It says none of the top 25 firms filed amicus (friend-of-the-court) briefs supporting the targeted firms.⁴⁸ On Mar 31, 2026 Judge Ali denied the government’s request to dismiss the case. He found a “real and immediate” threat of injury.⁴⁸,⁷⁸

Funding freezes and civil-rights findings

On Mar 7, 2025 Columbia lost $400M in grants and contracts. On Mar 10 the Education Department sent letters to 60 schools warning of Title VI enforcement over antisemitism complaints.⁴,⁵ Immigration authorities arrested campus activists Mahmoud Khalil (Mar 8) and Mohsen Mahdawi (Apr 14) (see Student Visas and Speech-Based Removals).¹⁷,¹⁸ Dozens of Princeton grants were suspended on Apr 1 with no clear reason, Princeton’s president said. On Apr 8 the White House confirmed freezes of more than $1B at Cornell and about $790M at Northwestern while civil-rights investigations were open.⁵²,⁹⁶

On Jul 28–31 the Education Department opened a Title VI investigation of how the Duke Law Journal picks its members. The Education secretary and the Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary asked Duke to review Duke Health “for the illegal use of race preferences.” They also asked Duke to make “all necessary organizational, leadership, and personnel changes,” and the Associated Press (AP) reported a $108M freeze by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).⁵⁴,⁹⁷ On Jul 29 DOJ concluded that UCLA’s response to its 2024 protest encampment was “deliberately indifferent” to a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students.⁸¹ On Jul 30 UCLA was told that research grants were suspended (the ledger gives $584M; one summary gives $548M).⁶⁰ DOJ found George Washington University “deliberately indifferent” to complaints of antisemitic harassment (Aug 12). The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights found that George Mason University broke Title VI “by illegally using race” in hiring and promotion (Aug 22). Each school was offered a voluntary resolution. No resolution of either has been located.⁵⁵,⁵⁶ On Aug 17–18, 2026 Haley Van Erem filed a whistleblower disclosure. She is a former Civil Rights Division lawyer who had been assigned to HHS for the Title VI investigations. She filed with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and with the DOJ and HHS inspectors general, the agencies’ internal watchdogs. Her disclosure alleges that the antisemitism task force’s outcomes were “predetermined, without regard to the evidence.” The disclosure says investigators at Brown found no violation. It alleges that “leadership refused to permit a notice of no violation,” and that officials discussed Harvard funding freezes and settlement terms. It says they did so before any violation was established. DOJ said it “stands behind the integrity” of its investigations. DOJ also said Van Erem did not work on university investigations while at DOJ.⁶⁵ An Aug 7 presidential memorandum ordered more reporting on admissions. The Education Department then demanded seven years of applicant, admit and enrollee data by race and sex. Judges first issued temporary restraining orders, short-term orders that pause something while a judge looks at the case, on Mar 13 and Mar 24, 2026,⁹⁴,⁹⁵ and then Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV (D. Mass.) acted on Apr 4, 2026. He issued a preliminary injunction, an order that stops something until the case is decided, against the deadlines for the 17 states that sued.⁵⁷,⁸⁸

In the University of California (UC) case, Judge Rita Lin (N.D. Cal.) ruled on Aug 12, 2025 that National Science Foundation (NSF) form letters cutting UCLA funds broke her June 23 injunction.⁶⁰,⁸² On Nov 14 she blocked a $1.2B demand against UCLA. She also barred UC funding cuts without the notice and hearing that Title VI requires. She cited “overwhelming evidence” of “a concerted campaign to purge ‘woke,’ ‘left,’ and ‘socialist’ viewpoints from our country’s leading universities.”⁹ The government dropped its appeal in February 2026 after Judge Lin agreed to change her order.³⁰

The administration also used Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972⁶⁷ (see Penn’s agreement under University agreements below). Title IX bans sex discrimination in schools that receive federal money. In a Jan 28, 2026 letter of findings, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights concluded that San José State University (SJSU) violated Title IX in its 2022–2024 seasons. It said SJSU did so by allowing Blaire Fleming, a transgender woman, to play women’s volleyball. It offered a resolution agreement that Inside Higher Ed described as “similar” to Penn’s. It also threatened SJSU’s access to federal student aid.⁶⁶ The California State University (CSU) trustees rejected the agreement and sued in federal court in Northern California (Board of Trustees of the California State University v. U.S. Department of Education, No. 5:26-cv-01970; filed Mar 6, 2026).⁶⁶ The 106-page complaint calls the findings “contrary to law” and “arbitrary and capricious,” a legal phrase for decisions that are not reasonably explained. It says the findings impose “unconstitutional conditions,” force speech and apply new duties to past conduct.⁶⁶ It says Fleming was eligible under NCAA rules, conference rules and the federal rules in force at the time. It says SJSU had to follow Ninth Circuit precedent barring discrimination against transgender students. It says the Education Department and DOJ read Title IX the same way in 2022–24; the Education Department had not responded in court as of Mar 11.⁶⁶

Harvard

The Education Department, HHS and the General Services Administration sent Harvard a joint demand letter dated Apr 11, 2025. It demanded that Harvard dismantle DEI, screen international students for “anti-Semitism” and adopt “viewpoint diversity.” After Harvard refused, the administration announced on Apr 14 a freeze of $2.2B in multi-year grants plus $60M in contracts. Harvard sued on Apr 21.¹⁹,⁵³ On Apr 15 and May 2 Trump posted that Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status (“It’s what they deserve!”).²⁰ On May 6 the Education Department said Harvard would get no new research grants unless it complied.⁷⁹ In May eight agencies cut off about $450M more. In June the HHS Office for Civil Rights formally accused Harvard of violating Title VI.⁵³ On Jun 4, Proclamation 10948 suspended entry of new Harvard students and exchange visitors on F, M and J visas. This came after a court blocked the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) move to revoke Harvard’s certification to enroll student-visa holders. A proclamation is a formal public announcement by the President. This one relied on § 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f))⁴¹, which lets the President suspend the entry of groups of foreigners. NPR put the number affected at more than 7,000 F-1 and J-1 visa holders.³⁶ Judge Allison Burroughs (D. Mass.) blocked it on Jun 23 as “inexplicable by anything but animus.” Animus means hostility.¹⁰⁰ In July Harvard gave employee records to DHS as part of a review of employment-eligibility forms (I-9). DHS issued a related subpoena, a legal order to hand over documents, for payroll records and employee rosters. On Jul 23 the State Department opened an investigation into whether Harvard may remain a sponsor in the Exchange Visitor Program.²¹,⁵³,⁸⁰

On Sept 3, 2025 Judge Burroughs cancelled the Harvard freeze. She found it was First Amendment retaliation. She also found it broke Title VI and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)⁴², the law that sets the rules agencies must follow. She called the freeze “a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault” and called antisemitism a “smokescreen.”⁸ The government appealed, and on Feb 2, 2026 Trump posted that he sought “One Billion Dollars in damages.”⁸,⁸⁷ On Feb 13 DOJ sued Harvard (D. Mass.) for five years of admissions data on each applicant to its college, law school and medical school. It alleged that the university had “slow-walked” a Title VI compliance review opened in April 2025. The complaint stated that the administration “does not accuse Harvard of any discriminatory conduct.”⁶⁴ On Aug 13 Judge Richard Stearns (D. Mass.) dismissed the administration’s Title VI suit to take back Harvard grants. He found the incidents “too isolated and episodic” to show an ongoing violation.²⁵ At the First Circuit argument on Oct 5, DOJ’s Michael Velchik made only one argument. He said the district court lacked the power to order payment because such claims belong in the Court of Federal Claims.⁹⁸ On Nov 2 Judge Myong Joun dismissed the records suit without prejudice, which means DOJ may file it again. He found that DOJ had not shown it first determined that it could not get Harvard to comply voluntarily. He wrote: “A deadline and a threat to sue, standing alone, do not necessarily demonstrate compliance.” DOJ called the ruling “a narrow pleading question” and said it will file a revised complaint.⁶⁴,⁹²

University agreements and the compact

Penn settled with no payment (Jul 1, 2025). It restored the records of swimmers who had lost to a transgender athlete and adopted the administration’s definitions of sex.⁶,⁵⁸,⁸³ Columbia (Jul 23) paid $200M to the government plus $21M to an EEOC fund. It accepted an independent monitor and a campus police force of at least 36 officers with arrest powers.⁷,⁵⁸ A faculty suit over the Columbia cuts was dismissed for lack of standing on Jun 16, 2025. Standing is the right to sue, which requires a real injury.⁸⁹ On May 14, 2026 the Second Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot, meaning it no longer mattered, because the agreement had restored most funding. The court also cancelled the district ruling, over Judge Menashi’s dissent.⁵⁹,⁹⁰ The suit was dismissed as moot on Jul 17, 2026, per the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).⁹¹ Brown (Jul 30) agreed to pay $50M over 10 years to Rhode Island workforce-development groups. It also agreed to adopt the administration’s definitions of “male” and “female,” and to disclose admissions data. About $510M was restored.⁶ UVA President Jim Ryan resigned Jun 27. Inside Higher Ed and the Virginia Mercury reported that DOJ’s Civil Rights Division had made his resignation a condition of settling an investigation of UVA. Harmeet Dhillon, who led that division, said UVA was “using a series of euphemisms to simply rebrand and repackage” the same programs. She denied that DOJ explicitly demanded his resignation.²² Ryan said, “I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job.”²² UVA’s agreement with no payment (Oct 22) paused five DOJ investigations. It requires compliance reports every quarter.⁵⁸,⁸⁴ Cornell (Nov 7) agreed to pay $30M to the government and $30M for agricultural research. It also agreed to give quarterly admissions data, with names removed, by race, GPA and test scores. Over $250M was restored.⁵⁸,⁸⁵ Northwestern (Nov 28) agreed to pay $75M over three years. It agreed to tighten protest rules, adopt the administration’s sex definitions and stop gender-affirming care for minors. About $790M was restored.⁵⁸,⁸⁶ On Oct 20, 2026 UNC–Chapel Hill signed an agreement with no payment. It closed about 18 Education Department investigations and a DOJ compliance review. UNC agreed to limit admissions officers’ access to applicants’ race. It also agreed to end “bridge” and “pipeline” recruitment partnerships.⁶¹

On Oct 1, 2025 the White House sent nine universities a “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” which offered “substantial and meaningful federal grants” in exchange for certain terms. The terms included a tuition freeze, a 15% cap on international undergraduates and government definitions of sex.²³ None of the nine signed.²⁴

Key dates

• 2025-01-29 — EO 14188 on antisemitism — → ledger
• 2025-03-06 — EO 14230 issued against Perkins Coie — → ledger
• 2025-03-07 — Columbia’s $400M in grants cut — → ledger
• 2025-04-11 — Five more firm deals; $940M total — → ledger
• 2025-04-14 — Harvard $2.2B freeze announced after the Apr 11 demand letter — → ledger
• 2025-05-02 — Perkins Coie order permanently blocked; appeals argued May 14, 2026 — → ledger
• 2025-06-16 — ABA sues over the “Law Firm Intimidation Policy” — → ledger
• 2025-07-23 — Columbia settles for $221M — → ledger
• 2025-09-03 — Burroughs voids Harvard freeze — → ledger
• 2025-10-01 — Compact for Academic Excellence — → ledger
• 2026-02-13 — DOJ sues Harvard for admissions records — → ledger
• 2026-08-17 to 18 — Van Erem whistleblower disclosure on antisemitism probes — → ledger
• 2026-10-05 — First Circuit hears the Harvard funding appeal — → ledger
• 2026-11-05 — Dhillon resigns; ABC reports Trump’s frustration over court losses — → ledger

Why it matters

First Amendment³⁸: the law-firm orders. The First Amendment protects free speech and bars the government from punishing people for it. The question is whether the President may take away a firm’s clearances, building access and contracts because of its clients and internal policies.³ The orders cited the firms’ work for Trump’s opponents and their DEI policies. For the firms, Paul Clement argued that the orders “strike at the heart of the First Amendment.”¹,⁴⁹,³ Four district courts held the orders unconstitutional. The appeal is undecided.³,⁴⁹

Reviewability of security-clearance decisions. The question is whether courts may review clearance revocations at all. DOJ argues that courts cannot review them “even if it is for improper motives.”³ In the Zaid case Judge Ali rejected DOJ’s “political question” argument. That appeal is undecided.⁴⁷,³⁷

First Amendment: a policy aimed at the bar. The bar means the legal profession. The question is whether the orders, memoranda and statements together form one policy that courts can review and that discourages lawyers from suing the government.³,⁴⁸ The ABA alleges such a “Law Firm Intimidation Policy.” Judge Ali denied the government’s request to dismiss,⁷⁸ and Judge Cooper, in a separate case, found DOJ’s ending of the ABA’s grants to be likely retaliation.⁴⁸,³⁵ The merits, meaning the main legal claims, are undecided.⁴⁸

Fed. R. Civ. P. 11⁶³ and Title VII (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2)⁶². In calling the targeted lawsuits “frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious,” the Mar 22 memorandum cited Rule 11. EO 14230 used Title VII as the basis for the EEOC’s review of hiring at large firms.⁴⁷,⁴⁶ The record shows no ruling on the memorandum. The students’ suit over the EEOC letters was dismissed based on the EEOC’s statement that the letters were voluntary.⁴⁶,⁷⁷

Title VI (42 U.S.C. § 2000d)³⁹ and its fund-termination procedure (§ 2000d-1)⁴⁰. The question is whether funds may be frozen while investigations are open, as at Duke, Cornell and Northwestern. The law says funds may be cut only after the notice, hearing and report that § 2000d-1 requires.⁵⁴,⁹⁷,⁹⁶,¹² The administration presented the actions as enforcement against antisemitism and discrimination. In some cases it acted through formal findings (UCLA, George Washington, George Mason) or a formal accusation (Harvard).¹⁰,⁵,⁶⁰,⁵⁵,⁵⁶,⁵³ Judge Lin barred UC cuts without that notice and hearing. Judge Joun dismissed DOJ’s records suit for skipping the step in § 2000d-1 that requires first seeking voluntary compliance.⁹² At the First Circuit, Judge Sandra Lynch noted, “There are no findings. There was no investigation.”⁹,⁶⁴,⁹⁸ Van Erem’s disclosure alleges predetermined outcomes. It has no reported result from the OSC or an inspector general.⁶⁵

Title IX (20 U.S.C. § 1681)⁶⁷ and Spending Clause notice (Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 1981)⁶⁸. The Spending Clause of the Constitution lets Congress attach conditions to federal money. The question is whether the Education Department may find a university in violation of Title IX for conduct in 2022–24, under a reading of the law adopted in 2025. The Supreme Court’s Pennhurst decision requires Congress to state conditions on federal funds “unambiguously” before the funds are accepted.⁶⁸ CSU argues that 2025 executive orders cannot change what Title IX required of SJSU in 2022–24. At that time, Ninth Circuit precedent and the Education Department’s and DOJ’s own reading barred discrimination against transgender students. The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights found SJSU in violation. The department had not responded in court as of Mar 11, 2026.⁶⁶ No ruling has been recorded.

First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706)⁴²: Harvard. The question is whether the university cuts were retaliation for speech.⁸ Judge Burroughs held that the Harvard freeze was First Amendment retaliation and broke the APA. She found that Proclamation 10948, issued under INA § 212(f) (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f))⁴¹, was “inexplicable by anything but animus.” The appeal of the freeze ruling is pending.⁸,¹⁰⁰,⁹⁸

Remedial jurisdiction (district court or Court of Federal Claims). The question is which court may order the government to repay ended grants. On appeal the administration argues only that such claims belong in the Court of Federal Claims, a special court for money claims against the government. The First Circuit has not ruled.⁹⁸

Unconstitutional conditions (Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, 2013)⁴³. Under this rule, the government may not make a benefit depend on giving up a constitutional right. The question is whether grants may depend on the compact’s terms. PEN America applied the rule to the compact, citing that case.²⁶ The record does not include the administration’s legal basis for the compact’s terms.

26 U.S.C. § 7217⁴⁴ (presidential audit requests). This law bars the President from asking the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to audit a particular taxpayer. The question is whether Trump’s posts saying Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status fall under it.²⁰ The record does not include the administration’s legal basis for the posts. On Oct 22, 2025 Senate Democrats Ron Wyden, Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren raised concerns about reported IRS activity against left-leaning nonprofits (see Prosecutions and Investigations of Trump Critics).²⁷

Outcome

Where things stand

All four law-firm injunctions remain in force until the D.C. Circuit rules.³,⁴⁹ The nine agreements ($940M) remain in place. Trump called them “damages” (see Media Settlements and Trump’s Lawsuits). Skadden did free work for the Commerce Department while advising Intel on its equity-stake deal with the department.²,¹⁶,³² House Oversight Democrats wrote to the settling firms in April 2025, and Kirkland has produced no documents in response to six congressional letters. The latest letter is dated Oct 15, 2026.¹³,³²

Four universities paid a combined $406M. Three signed agreements with no payment. Their terms include admissions-data reporting, government sex definitions, protest rules and a monitor. Their funding was restored.⁶,⁷,⁵⁸,⁶¹ Harvard has paid nothing and is waiting for the First Circuit.⁹⁹,⁹⁸ CSU’s suit over the Education Department’s Title IX finding against San José State is pending in the N.D. Cal., with no response from the department recorded as of Mar 11, 2026.⁶⁶ Harmeet Dhillon resigned Nov 5, 2026. NPR reported that under her, the Civil Rights Division made campus antisemitism a priority while withdrawing voting-rights cases (see Justice Department and FBI Personnel Changes). ABC News reported Trump had been frustrated by court losses.²⁸,³¹ Related disputes are in Conflicts Between the Executive and the Courts.

Status

Who is affected

The law-firm actions reach firms and their lawyers through suspended security clearances, limits on access to federal buildings, contract reviews and limits on federal hiring. They reach law-student applicants through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) demands for diversity data.¹,⁴⁶ The university actions reach researchers through frozen and ended grants. They reach international students through a visa proclamation, and applicants through admissions-data demands and settlement terms.⁴,⁵²,³⁶,⁵⁷,⁵⁸ Students, athletes and patients at settling universities are reached through terms on protest rules, sex definitions, policing and gender-affirming care for minors.⁶,⁷,⁵⁸ Survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault were reached through the end of American Bar Association (ABA) legal-aid grants.³⁵

• Harvard researchers and grantees (funding freeze announced Apr 14, 2025, Blocked) — the administration froze $2.2 billion in multi-year grants plus $60 million in contracts. Eight agencies cut off about $450 million more in May. Judge Allison Burroughs cancelled the freeze on Sept 3, 2025, and the government’s appeal was argued Oct 5, 2026.¹⁹,⁵³,⁸,⁹⁸
• Researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (grant suspension and $1.2 billion demand, Blocked) — UCLA was told Jul 30, 2025 that research grants were suspended ($584 million in the ledger, $548 million in one summary). Judge Rita Lin found on Aug 12 that National Science Foundation form letters cutting UCLA funds broke her injunction,⁸² and on Nov 14 she blocked the $1.2 billion demand. She also barred University of California funding cuts without the notice and hearing Title VI requires.⁶⁰,⁹
• Law firms that settled (nine agreements, In force; Paul Weiss order, Reversed) — nine firms promised a total of $940 million in pro bono work by Apr 11, 2025. Skadden did free work for the Commerce Department while advising Intel on its equity-stake deal with the department.²,¹³,³²
• Columbia researchers, students and staff (grants cut Mar 7, 2025; settlement Jul 23, 2025, In force) — Columbia lost $400 million in grants and contracts. It then paid $200 million to the government plus $21 million to an EEOC fund. It accepted an independent monitor and a campus police force of at least 36 officers with arrest powers. The Second Circuit found the agreement had restored most funding (May 14, 2026).⁴,⁷,⁵⁸,⁵⁹
• Researchers and students at Cornell, Northwestern and Brown (freezes, then payment settlements, In force) — the White House confirmed freezes of more than $1 billion at Cornell and about $790 million at Northwestern on Apr 8, 2025. Brown’s agreement (Jul 30) restored about $510 million for $50 million over 10 years to Rhode Island workforce groups. Cornell’s (Nov 7) restored over $250 million for $60 million. Northwestern’s (Nov 28) restored about $790 million for $75 million, with an end to gender-affirming care for minors and tighter protest rules.⁹⁶,⁶,⁵⁸,⁸⁵,⁸⁶
• International students at Harvard (Proclamation 10948, Blocked) — the Jun 4, 2025 proclamation suspended entry of new Harvard students and exchange visitors on F, M and J visas. Per NPR, it affected more than 7,000 F-1 and J-1 visa holders. Judge Burroughs blocked it on Jun 23, 2025 as “inexplicable by anything but animus.”³⁶,¹⁰⁰
• Law firms that sued and their lawyers (four orders, Blocked) — the orders suspended clearances, limited building access and ordered contract reviews. Trial judges struck down the Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey orders between May 2 and Jun 27, 2025, and the combined appeal was argued May 14, 2026.¹,³,⁴⁹,¹⁴
• Applicants to universities in 17 states (admissions-data demand, Blocked) — the Education Department demanded seven years of applicant, admit and enrollee data by race and sex. On Apr 4, 2026 Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV blocked its deadlines with a preliminary injunction for the 17 states that sued.⁵⁷,⁸⁸
• Law-student applicants (EEOC letters, Concluded) — on Mar 17, 2025 the EEOC’s acting chair sent 20 firms demands for diversity data, including personal information on law-student applicants. A students’ suit was dismissed Feb 9, 2026 based on the EEOC’s statement that the letters were voluntary.⁴⁶,⁷⁷
• Domestic-violence and sexual-assault survivors (ABA grant terminations, Blocked) — the Justice Department (DOJ) ended five ABA Office on Violence Against Women grants worth $3.2 million on Apr 10, 2025. On May 14 Judge Christopher Cooper blocked the terminations as likely First Amendment retaliation and ordered the remaining ~$2 million paid.³⁵
• Duke researchers (Duke investigations and freeze, Unresolved) — the Associated Press reported a $108 million National Institutes of Health freeze at Duke on Jul 28–31, 2025, when the Education and Health and Human Services secretaries asked Duke to review Duke Health “for the illegal use of race preferences.” No resolution has been located.⁵⁴,⁹⁷
• Students and applicants at Penn, the University of Virginia (UVA) and the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill (no-payment agreements, In force) — Penn (Jul 1, 2025) restored records of swimmers who had lost to a transgender athlete and adopted the administration’s definitions of sex. UVA (Oct 22, 2025) paused five DOJ investigations and agreed to quarterly compliance reports. UNC–Chapel Hill (Oct 20, 2026) closed about 18 investigations. It agreed to limit admissions officers’ access to applicants’ race and to end “bridge” and “pipeline” recruitment partnerships.⁶,⁵⁸,⁸³,⁸⁴,⁶¹
• San José State University students (Title IX finding, Pending) — the Education Department’s Jan 28, 2026 letter of findings threatened the university’s access to federal student aid. The California State University trustees rejected the proposed agreement and sued (Mar 6, 2026).⁶⁶
• Lawyers who litigate against the administration (ABA v. Trump, Pending) — the ABA says none of the top 25 firms filed amicus briefs supporting the targeted firms. On Mar 31, 2026 Judge Ali denied the government’s request to dismiss, finding a “real and immediate” threat of injury.⁴⁸,⁷⁸

Key players

• Donald Trump — President — signed the memoranda and EOs, called the pledges “damages,” posted that Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status.¹,⁴⁵,⁴⁷,¹⁶,²⁰
• Todd Blanche — Deputy Attorney General — issued the ABA-events memo and the outside-counsel bar.³⁵,⁴⁷,⁷³
• Andrea Lucas — EEOC Acting Chair — sent the law-firm letters.⁴⁶
• Harmeet Dhillon — Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights (resigned Nov 5, 2026) — headed the division during the UVA investigation and Harvard suit.²⁸,²²,²⁵,³¹
• Jim Ryan — UVA president — resigned Jun 27, 2025.²²
• Judges Bates, Leon, AliKhan, Cooper, Ali — federal district judges — ruled for Jenner, WilmerHale, Susman, the ABA and Zaid.⁴⁹,¹⁴,³⁵,³⁷,⁴⁸
• Judges Burroughs, Lin, Stearns, Saylor, Joun — federal district judges — ruled against the Harvard freeze and proclamation, the UCLA demand, the clawback suit, the admissions-data deadlines and the Harvard records suit.⁸,¹⁰⁰,⁹,²⁵,⁵⁷,⁶⁴
• Haley Van Erem — former Civil Rights Division lawyer — filed the whistleblower disclosure on the antisemitism probes.⁶⁵
• Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey — targeted firms — sued and won in district court.³

Chronology

• 2025-01-29 — EO 14188 on antisemitism — → ledger
• 2025-02-03 — Task Force to Combat Antisemitism — → ledger
• 2025-02-25 — Memorandum suspending Covington & Burling lawyers’ clearances — → ledger
• 2025-03-06 — EO 14230 issued against Perkins Coie — → ledger
• 2025-03-07 — Columbia’s $400M in grants cut — → ledger
• 2025-03-08 — ICE arrests Mahmoud Khalil — → ledger
• 2025-03-10 — Education Dept letters to 60 schools — → ledger
• 2025-03-14 — Paul Weiss order and $40M agreement — → ledger
• 2025-03-17 — EEOC letters to 20 law firms — → ledger
• 2025-03-21 — Government moves to disqualify the Perkins Coie judge — → ledger
• 2025-03-21 — EO 14244 revokes the Paul Weiss order — → ledger
• 2025-03-22 — Memorandum on sanctions against lawyers who sue the government — → ledger
• 2025-03-22 — Memorandum revokes clearances of 15 named people, including Mark Zaid — → ledger
• 2025-03-25 — EO 14246 against Jenner & Block; struck down May 23 — → ledger
• 2025-03-26 — Court denies the Perkins Coie disqualification motion — → ledger
• 2025-03-27 — EO 14250 against WilmerHale; struck May 27 — → ledger
• 2025-03-28 — Skadden $100M deal; Willkie (Apr 1) and Milbank follow — → ledger
• 2025-04-01 — Princeton grants suspended — → ledger
• 2025-04-07 — Dhillon sworn in; Civil Rights Division reshaped; resigns Nov 2026 — → ledger
• 2025-04-08 — White House confirms Cornell and Northwestern freezes — → ledger
• 2025-04-08 — Trump cites $340 million in “damages” — → ledger
• 2025-04-09 — EO 14263 against Susman Godfrey; struck down Jun 27 — → ledger
• 2025-04-11 — Five more firm deals; $940M total — → ledger
• 2025-04-14 — Harvard $2.2B freeze announced after the Apr 11 demand letter — → ledger
• 2025-04-14 — Mahdawi arrested at naturalization interview — → ledger
• 2025-04-15 — Trump posts on Harvard’s tax-exempt status — → ledger
• 2025-05-02 — Perkins Coie order permanently blocked; appeals argued May 14, 2026 — → ledger
• 2025-05-06 — Education Dept: no new research grants for Harvard — → ledger
• 2025-05-09 — Blanche bars hiring outside counsel from firms suing the administration — → ledger
• 2025-05-14 — Cooper enjoins DOJ’s ABA grant terminations — → ledger
• 2025-05-23 — Judge Bates voids the Jenner & Block order — → ledger
• 2025-06-04 — Proclamation 10948 on Harvard’s foreign students — → ledger
• 2025-06-16 — ABA sues over the “Law Firm Intimidation Policy” — → ledger
• 2025-06-16 — AAUP suit over Columbia cuts dismissed for lack of standing — → ledger
• 2025-06-23 — Burroughs enjoins Proclamation 10948 — → ledger
• 2025-06-27 — UVA President Ryan resigns — → ledger
• 2025-06-27 — Judge AliKhan grants Susman Godfrey summary judgment — → ledger
• 2025-07 — Title VI/IX notice, hearing and report-to-Congress requirements — → ledger
• 2025-07-01 — Penn agreement over a transgender swimmer — → ledger
• 2025-07-09 — Noem demands Harvard records; DHS says it will subpoena them — → ledger
• 2025-07-23 — Columbia settles for $221M — → ledger
• 2025-07-23 — State Department opens Exchange Visitor Program investigation of Harvard — → ledger
• 2025-07-28 — Duke investigation and joint letter — → ledger
• 2025-07-(week of 28) — NIH freezes Duke funding — → ledger
• 2025-07-29 — DOJ findings against UCLA — → ledger
• 2025-07-30 — Brown settles for $50M — → ledger
• 2025-08-07 — Admissions-reporting memorandum — → ledger
• 2025-08-12 — DOJ Title VI findings against George Washington University — → ledger
• 2025-08-12 — Judge Lin: NSF letters cutting UCLA funds violated her injunction — → ledger
• 2025-08-22 — OCR finds George Mason violated Title VI — → ledger
• 2025-08-22 — Government appeals the Susman Godfrey ruling — → ledger
• 2025-09-03 — Burroughs voids Harvard freeze — → ledger
• 2025-09-30 — Trump says a $500M Harvard deal is near; none materializes — → ledger
• 2025-10 — Reported IRS-CI activity concerning left-leaning nonprofits — → ledger
• 2025-10-01 — Compact for Academic Excellence — → ledger
• 2025-10-22 — UVA no-payment agreement with DOJ — → ledger
• 2025-11-07 — Cornell agreement: $60M; over $250M restored — → ledger
• 2025-11-14 — Judge Lin blocks UCLA demand — → ledger
• 2025-11-28 — Northwestern agreement: $75M; about $790M restored — → ledger
• 2025-12-23 — Ali enjoins Zaid clearance revocation; appeal argued May 14, 2026 — → ledger
• 2026-02-02 — Trump seeks “One Billion Dollars in damages” from Harvard — → ledger
• 2026-02-06 — D.C. Circuit consolidates the four law-firm appeals — → ledger
• 2026-02-09 — Doe v. EEOC dismissed on stipulation — → ledger
• 2026-02-13 — DOJ sues Harvard for admissions records — → ledger
• 2026-03-06 — CSU sues Education Department over San José State Title IX finding — → ledger
• 2026-03-13 — First TRO against admissions-data deadlines — → ledger
• 2026-03-24 — Second TRO in the 17-state admissions-data case — → ledger
• 2026-03-31 — Judge Ali denies motion to dismiss ABA v. Trump — → ledger
• 2026-04-04 — Judge Saylor enjoins admissions-data deadlines for 17 states — → ledger
• 2026-05-14 — Second Circuit dismisses AAUP appeal as moot — → ledger
• 2026-07-17 — AAUP v. DOJ dismissed — → ledger
• 2026-08-13 — Stearns dismisses Harvard Title VI suit — → ledger
• 2026-08-17 to 18 — Van Erem whistleblower disclosure on antisemitism probes — → ledger
• 2026-10-05 — First Circuit hears the Harvard funding appeal — → ledger
• 2026-10-20 — UNC–Chapel Hill no-payment agreement — → ledger
• 2026-11-02 — Judge Joun dismisses DOJ’s Harvard records suit — → ledger
• 2026-11-05 — Dhillon resigns; ABC reports Trump’s frustration over court losses — → ledger

Sources