SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission," said a spokesperson for the Ivy League school.
Harvard University pushed back forcefully Friday after President Donald Trump declared in a social media post that "we are going to be taking away Harvard Tax Exempt Status," adding that is "what they deserve."
Trump's comment came just hours after Democratic senators sent a letter demanding a probe into whether the administration is acting illegally by trying to compel the U.S. Internal Revenue Service to yank the university's tax exemption.
Trump's post did not specify whether the IRS, the entity that has the power to remove an organization's tax-exempt status, is opting to remove Harvard's designation. Multiple outlets noted they got no immediate response from the IRS when they asked the agency for comment.
"There is no legal basis to rescind Harvard's tax-exempt status," a university spokesperson said in a statement, according toPolitico. "Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission."
It is illegal for the president, vice president, or other top officials to request, indirectly or directly, that the IRS audit a particular taxpayer.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and multiple other Democratic senators on Friday asked the Acting Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to probe whether the IRS has received illegal pressure from the administration when it comes to Harvard, and to provide information about whether the agency is looking into other entities at the direction of the president or other top officials.
"It is both illegal and unconstitutional for the IRS to take direction from the president to target schools, hospitals, churches, or any other tax-exempt entities as retribution for using their free speech rights," the senators wrote in a letter dated Friday to the Acting TIGTA Heather Hill.
"It is further unconscionable that the IRS would become a weapon of the Trump administration to extort its perceived enemies, but the actions of the president and his operatives have now made this fear a reality. We request that you review whether the president or his allies have taken any step to direct or pressure the IRS to take politically-motivated actions regarding the tax-exempt status of the president's political targets," they continued.
Loss of tax-exempt status, something that would only typically occur after an audit process that allows the university opportunity to defend itself and appeal, would be extremely significant for the university. Tax-exempt status means the school does not pay federal income tax on charitable contributions to the school and other income. It also means that donations to the school are tax-exempt for those who make them.
Trump mused publicly on April 16 that Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status, after the university's president said the institution would not comply with a list of policy demands from the president, that included, according to the Harvard Crimson, derecognizing pro-Palestine student groups and auditing academic programs for viewpoint diversity. The pushback from Harvard prompted the administration to freeze over $2 billion in federal funding for the school.
That same week, it was reported that the IRS was making plans to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status.
In response to Trump's bullying tactics, Harvard sued the administration, calling the freeze on funding unlawful and asking the court to restore it.
The tangling between Harvard and the Trump administration is part of a broader wave of scrutiny by the White House on higher education.
"On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None," wrote one Georgetown University professor.
U.S. President Donald Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social on Saturday to demand an apology from Maine Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, after the two had a heated exchange at the White House in February over an executive order banning transgender women and girls from playing in women's sports.
This new scrutiny on Maine comes as the state has been subject to numerous probes and funding cuts following that exchange that "have been widely interpreted as retaliatory," according to the local outlet the Maine Morning Star.
"While the state of Maine has apologized for their governor's strong, but totally incorrect, statement about men playing in women's sports while at the White House House Governor's Conference, we have not heard from the governor herself, and she is the one that matters in such cases," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"Therefore, we need a full-throated apology from the governor herself and a statement that she will never make such an unlawful challenge to the federal government again before this case can be settled," he added.
The statement, according to Politico, implied that the Trump administration would continue to target Maine unless Trump receives the apology he wants.
"King Trump demands an apology from the Governor of Maine because she embarrassed him" wrote former NBCUniversal studio executive Mike Sington. "Pathetic."
Multiple outlets reporting on the remarks from Trump noted it was not immediately clear what Trump meant when he said that the "state of Maine" had apologized.
On Saturday, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows wrote on Bluesky: "Can confirm 'state of Maine' hasn't apologized. (As the official keeper of all state records and guardian of the seal ;))."
Jonathan Ladd, an associate professor at Georgetown University's public policy school, wrote that "Trump is constitutionally required to take care that U.S. laws be faithfully executed. On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None."
The dispute between Trump and Mills stems from an interaction at a White House event as part of the National Governors Association on February 21.
"We're going to follow the law sir. We'll see you in court," Mills told the president in a heated exchange, referring to the Maine Human Rights Act, which was amended four years ago to include gender identity as a protected class. Mills and Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey have argued that the law supersedes the president's edict barring transgender girls from participating in sports that match their gender identity.
Since that episode, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services investigated and found Maine to be in violation of Title IX for allowing transgender girls to compete in women's sports, the U.S. Department of Agriculture launched and resolved a probe into the University of Maine System's Title IX compliance, and the Trump administration briefly imposed an end to the practice of allowing parents to register their newborns for a social security card at the hospital, among other measures.
"Donald Trump is not concerned with Americans' health or economic wellbeing. He is only concerned with helping out his billionaire buddies in the fossil fuel industry," said one climate advocate.
After U.S. President Donald Trump declared on Truth Social on Monday night that he is ordering his administration "to immediately begin producing Energy with BEAUTIFUL, CLEAN COAL," a leader at the grassroots environmental group Sierra Club quickly hit back, calling the move "completely delusional."
Trump said he was announcing the move as a means to counter China's economic edge. The announcement comes "after years of being held captive by Environmental Extremists, Lunatics, Radicals, and Thugs, allowing other Countries, in particular China, to gain tremendous Economic advantage over us by opening up hundreds of all Coal Fire Power Plants," Trump wrote.
It was not immediately clear what Trump's directive was referring to or how his announcement on social media would impact U.S. policy, according to Bloomberg.
"There is no such thing as clean coal. There is only coal that pollutes our air and water so severely that nearly half a million Americans have died prematurely from coal in the last two decades," said Sierra Club director of climate policy Patrick Drupp in a statement Tuesday. "Donald Trump is not concerned with Americans' health or economic wellbeing. He is only concerned with helping out his billionaire buddies in the fossil fuel industry."
Trump's cabinet includes a number figures who are friendly to the fossil fuel industry, such as Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who was a fracking industry CEO, and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, a known ally of oil and gas companies.
On his first day in office, Trump declared a national energy emergency to ensure "an affordable and reliable domestic supply of energy," called for expedited "permitting and leasing of energy and natural resource projects in Alaska," and withdrew the United States from the the world's main climate pact.
The U.S. is mulling using emergency authority to bring coal-fired plants back online and halt others from shutting, Burgum toldBloomberg Television in an interview last week.
"Under the national energy emergency, which President Trump has declared, we've got to keep every coal plant open," Burgum said while at the energy sector gathering CERAWeek. "And if there had been units at a coal plant that have been shut down, we need to bring those back."
Meanwhile, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin earlier this month announced a new effort to rollback a host of EPA regulations, including some that will impact coal producers.
The coal mining company Peabody Energy saw their stock rise 3.5% after Trump's Monday post on social media about "clean coal," according to Tuesday morning reporting from Schaeffer's Investment Research.
As of 2023, coal accounted for 16.2% of U.S. electricity generation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That year, 21.4% came from renewables.
In its statement released on Tuesday, Sierra Club took issue with Trump's assertion that investing in coal has provided an economic boost to other countries. "Trump refers to the 'Economic advantage' that burning coal has afforded other nations. In reality, renewable energy is quickly becoming more affordable and reliable than coal," they wrote.
In 2023, the think tank Energy Innovation Policy & Technology released an analysis which found that 99% of coal plants are more expensive to run compared to replacing their generation capacity with either solar or wind power, when taking into account credits that were made available through the Inflation Reduction Act.