1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

So much losing. 

I enjoyed the reporting on the Chinese government parade and reflected on how trump so much wanted a parade like that. He would have fit right in walking alongside Putin, Xi and Un. His only problem? He can’t seem to get us Americans to have government such as in Russia, China and North Korea.

1 hour ago, impulse said:

The title is wrong.  Harvard won a round.  The fight won't be over until the Supreme Court weighs in. 

 

But I doubt Trump will pull a Biden and thumb his nose at any Supreme Court ruling if it goes against him like Student Loan Forgiveness did.

 

 

1 hour ago, Mad Mustang said:

Meh. It won’t be hard for the republicans to get that over turned. No money since last April, how sad😂😂😂😂

They'll need the SC for that. And will they weigh in?

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Sure. Let me hold your hand for a moment and coach you through a very elemental lesson in economics 101.

 

The crucial importance of the research university as a key asset in achieving economic prosperity and security is widely understood, as evidenced by the efforts that nations around the globe are making to create and sustain institutions of world-class quality. Yet, while America’s research universities remain the strongest in the world, they are threatened by many forces: national and state economic challenges, the emergence of global competitors, changing student demographics, and rapidly evolving technologies. And even as other countries have emulated the United States in building research universities to drive economic growth, America’s commitment to sustaining the research partnership that built a great industrial nation seems to have waned.

During past eras of challenge and change, our national leaders have acted decisively to enable universities to enhance American prosperity and security. While the country was engaged in the Civil War, Congress passed the Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 to forge a partnership between the federal government, the states, higher education, and industry aimed at creating universities that could extend educational opportunities to the working class while conducting the applied research that would enable Americans to become world leaders in agriculture and industry. Eighty years later, emerging from the Great Depression and World War II, Congress invested heavily in basic research and graduate education to build the world’s finest research universities, capable of providing the steady stream of well-educated graduates and scientific and technological innovations central to our robust economy, vibrant culture, vital health enterprise, and national security in a complex, competitive, and challenging world.

 

This is a shameless response.

16 minutes ago, stevenl said:

 

They'll need the SC for that. And will they weigh in?

Conservatives on the SC may not truly align with Trump. Trump may have over estimated his influence. Public trust in the SC has plummeted and see the court as too political. That may have a bearing on their decision. 

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Sure. Let me hold your hand for a moment and coach you through a very elemental lesson in economics 101.

 

The crucial importance of the research university as a key asset in achieving economic prosperity and security is widely understood, as evidenced by the efforts that nations around the globe are making to create and sustain institutions of world-class quality. Yet, while America’s research universities remain the strongest in the world, they are threatened by many forces: national and state economic challenges, the emergence of global competitors, changing student demographics, and rapidly evolving technologies. And even as other countries have emulated the United States in building research universities to drive economic growth, America’s commitment to sustaining the research partnership that built a great industrial nation seems to have waned.

During past eras of challenge and change, our national leaders have acted decisively to enable universities to enhance American prosperity and security. While the country was engaged in the Civil War, Congress passed the Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 to forge a partnership between the federal government, the states, higher education, and industry aimed at creating universities that could extend educational opportunities to the working class while conducting the applied research that would enable Americans to become world leaders in agriculture and industry. Eighty years later, emerging from the Great Depression and World War II, Congress invested heavily in basic research and graduate education to build the world’s finest research universities, capable of providing the steady stream of well-educated graduates and scientific and technological innovations central to our robust economy, vibrant culture, vital health enterprise, and national security in a complex, competitive, and challenging world.

I second your comments. Also, people should realize that Harvard, despite its huge endowment, does not have access to most of these funds because gifts to the endowment were given for specific purposes, while these days big endowment managers have been investing a significant share in illiquid assets such as private equity. Meanwhile some Zionist alumni are stopping their giving, or, in one case of a Penn alumnus, trying to take back a gift of $100 mn given a number of years ago!

4 hours ago, impulse said:

The title is wrong.  Harvard won a round.  The fight won't be over until the Supreme Court weighs in. 

 

But I doubt Trump will pull a Biden and thumb his nose at any Supreme Court ruling if it goes against him like Student Loan Forgiveness did.

 

The looney left media do this time and time again, with CNN one of the top rung.

Some left wing judge can't help themselves, bleats a decision and woe is Trump, he loses again.

Then it gets appealed.

Anyone keeping track of how many times Trump administration has lost, only to win later and higher, where a sole left wing judge can't impact? Maybe CNN can tell us.

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

No intelligent response?

Intelligent response to your moronic dog whistle reaction ("...extreme left wing activist judges...") to every court decision that goes against Trump?😆

3 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

Yeah, we don’t need no stinkin higher education research done … we got common since! 

Yes, we're doing our own research, thank you!

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Once again extreme left wing activist judges running the US instead of the democratically elected government.

 

Shameful. 

The comment seems to frame the judge’s ruling as an overreach by an unelected official?

 

Judge Allison Burroughs, in her ruling, found that the Trump administration’s attempt to freeze $2 billion in research funding for Harvard lacked **legal** grounding and appeared to be an ideological move rather than a justified policy action. Her decision was based on **legal** reasoning, not political activism—judges are tasked with interpreting the law and ensuring government actions align with constitutional principles, not with enforcing the will of the elected government when it oversteps.

 

The term “activist judge” often gets thrown around to suggest bias when people don't like it, but judicial independence is a cornerstone of a democratic system. Judges, whether appointed by Democratic or Republican administrations, are meant to check executive power when it violates legal standards. Burroughs, appointed by Obama, ruled against what she saw as an unlawful freeze, protecting research funding that could impact decades of scientific progress. This isn’t about “running the US” but ensuring the government follows the rule of law.

 

If you’re concerned about unelected judges overriding elected officials, that’s a valid point to explore—it’s a tension built into the Constitution through checks and balances. The judiciary’s role is to protect against overreach, whether from the left or right, not just the left as you see it.

 

If you disagree with the ruling that you call shameful, what specific legal issues do you see with it outside of your political bias? That could help ground the discussion in the case itself rather than broad labels and bs like “extreme left wing.”

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Once again extreme left wing activist judges running the US instead of the democratically elected government.

 

Shameful. 

Did you read what Judge Burroughs said about the potential danger that Trump’s tantrum against Harvard posed?

She said that his action “jeopardised years of research “.

Donny, the wheels are coming off!

 The rest of the world is watching and laughing. Good job that you have the absentee Clacton MP over there brown nosing you and massaging your fragile ego cos, apart from your White House sycophants, the rest of US are rejecting you.

The seeds of democracy are beginning to show green shoots at last.

7 hours ago, In Full Agreement said:

 

 

It's wrong in so many ways for Trump to interfere  with institutions of higher learning.

 

 

 

Why should tax payers money be given to an anti semitic institution?

7 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Sure. Let me hold your hand for a moment and coach you through a very elemental lesson in economics 101.

 

The crucial importance of the research university as a key asset in achieving economic prosperity and security is widely understood, as evidenced by the efforts that nations around the globe are making to create and sustain institutions of world-class quality. Yet, while America’s research universities remain the strongest in the world, they are threatened by many forces: national and state economic challenges, the emergence of global competitors, changing student demographics, and rapidly evolving technologies. And even as other countries have emulated the United States in building research universities to drive economic growth, America’s commitment to sustaining the research partnership that built a great industrial nation seems to have waned.

During past eras of challenge and change, our national leaders have acted decisively to enable universities to enhance American prosperity and security. While the country was engaged in the Civil War, Congress passed the Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 to forge a partnership between the federal government, the states, higher education, and industry aimed at creating universities that could extend educational opportunities to the working class while conducting the applied research that would enable Americans to become world leaders in agriculture and industry. Eighty years later, emerging from the Great Depression and World War II, Congress invested heavily in basic research and graduate education to build the world’s finest research universities, capable of providing the steady stream of well-educated graduates and scientific and technological innovations central to our robust economy, vibrant culture, vital health enterprise, and national security in a complex, competitive, and challenging world.

That went whoosh right over the the head of susanlea/ Jonny F.

2 hours ago, Donga said:

The looney left media do this time and time again, with CNN one of the top rung.

Some left wing judge can't help themselves, bleats a decision and woe is Trump, he loses again.

Then it gets appealed.

Anyone keeping track of how many times Trump administration has lost, only to win later and higher, where a sole left wing judge can't impact? Maybe CNN can tell us.

Well we could start with the 61 lawsuits in which Trump alleged the 2020 election was rigged.

All were thrown out but, of course, blinkered MAGA morons won’t discuss this.

15 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Why should tax payers money be given to an anti semitic institution?

Because Hazard is not an anti-semitic institution and the funding freeze is an overreached and the court ruled that it is also illegal. 3 strikes law. 

4 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Conservatives on the SC may not truly align with Trump. Trump may have over estimated his influence. Public trust in the SC has plummeted and see the court as too political. That may have a bearing on their decision. 

Talking about Conservatives.

 

 

9 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Once again extreme left wing activist judges running the US instead of the democratically elected government.

 

Shameful. 

Sorry to break it to you,but then again you aren’t American.We aren’t a dictatorship….yet….and I hope personally that we don’t become one.hopefully this is a victory in the assault of our education system by trump and his minions.

Hardly surprising that the finest minds in the country won against a moron.

This is the same judge who claimed Harvard was not discriminated against Asian students, and was smacked down by SCOUTS. 

10 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Sure. Let me hold your hand for a moment and coach you through a very elemental lesson in economics 101.

It's obvious you ever attended an Econ 101 class. 

3 hours ago, Red Forever said:

Did you read what Judge Burroughs said about the potential danger that Trump’s tantrum against Harvard posed?

She said that his action “jeopardised years of research “.

Donny, the wheels are coming off!

 The rest of the world is watching and laughing. Good job that you have the absentee Clacton MP over there brown nosing you and massaging your fragile ego cos, apart from your White House sycophants, the rest of US are rejecting you.

The seeds of democracy are beginning to show green shoots at last.

She is not ruling on the impact of research.  She is ruling on if the feds can pull back funding. 

3 hours ago, proton said:

 

Why should tax payers money be given to an anti semitic institution?

Don't forget that Harvard hates Asians. 

"...a federal judge..." 

11 hours ago, In Full Agreement said:

 

 

It's wrong in so many ways for Trump to interfere  with institutions of higher learning.

 

 

Government never interfere  with institutions of higher learning?  Really?  

10 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

No intelligent response?

Do you really expect one from the OP? 

10 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

While the country was engaged in the Civil War, Congress passed the Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 to forge a partnership between the federal government, the states, higher education, and industry aimed at creating universities that could extend educational opportunities to the working class while conducting the applied research that would enable Americans to become world leaders in agriculture and industry.

Harvard is not a land grant college, it's a private college. 

9 hours ago, In Full Agreement said:

How do you figure Harvard is antisemitic?

 

Jewish students at Harvard were harassed by pro-Palestinian students and faculty, but the administration did nothing about it.  Even if Jewish students complained about violations of the university's Code of Conduct aimed at them,  Harvard officials failed to make any meaningful response.  

 

Spurred by dissatisfaction from students, influential alumni, the public at large and ultimately, the Trump Administration, Harvard's president appointed a task force to investigate antisemitism on campus.  After months of foot-dragging, the task force finally released a 311-page report which detailed the prevailing antisemitic atmosphere at Harvard. 

 

You can read the report here:       https://www.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/FINAL-Harvard-ASAIB-Report-4.29.25.pdf

It's pretty shocking stuff for an elite university that had once been considered one of the best in the world.

15 hours ago, Red Forever said:

Well we could start with the 61 lawsuits in which Trump alleged the 2020 election was rigged.

All were thrown out but, of course, blinkered MAGA morons won’t discuss this.

Not a problem:

1. One he wasn't going to win and the law prevails
2. You start with that one, and seemingly end with it

Anymore, champ?

2 minutes ago, Donga said:

Not a problem:

1. One he wasn't going to win and the law prevails
2. You start with that one, and seemingly end with it

Anymore, champ?

You spelled chump wrong. 

10 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

Jewish students at Harvard were harassed by pro-Palestinian students and faculty, but the administration did nothing about it.  Even if Jewish students complained about violations of the university's Code of Conduct aimed at them,  Harvard officials failed to make any meaningful response.  

 

Spurred by dissatisfaction from students, influential alumni, the public at large and ultimately, the Trump Administration, Harvard's president appointed a task force to investigate antisemitism on campus.  After months of foot-dragging, the task force finally released a 311-page report which detailed the prevailing antisemitic atmosphere at Harvard. 

 

You can read the report here:       https://www.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/FINAL-Harvard-ASAIB-Report-4.29.25.pdf

It's pretty shocking stuff for an elite university that had once been considered one of the best in the world.

The more prestigious the institution, the more out of touch they get over time

11 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

Jewish students at Harvard were harassed by pro-Palestinian students and faculty, but the administration did nothing about it.  Even if Jewish students complained about violations of the university's Code of Conduct aimed at them,  Harvard officials failed to make any meaningful response.  

 

Spurred by dissatisfaction from students, influential alumni, the public at large and ultimately, the Trump Administration, Harvard's president appointed a task force to investigate antisemitism on campus.  After months of foot-dragging, the task force finally released a 311-page report which detailed the prevailing antisemitic atmosphere at Harvard. 

 

You can read the report here:       https://www.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/FINAL-Harvard-ASAIB-Report-4.29.25.pdf

It's pretty shocking stuff for an elite university that had once been considered one of the best in the world.

One does have to account for the fact that Israel is the largest single lobby in the United States, and a fortune is spent on promoting Israel's agenda. There's also a high degree of confusion and distortion when it comes to criticism of official Israeli policy, which is quite often labeled as being anti-semitic behavior, which is total BS. 

 

Granted protests that show support for Hamas and Hezbollah are pretty ridiculous, but we're likely not talking about the same thing here.