Harvard University, going on the offense in its standoff with the Trump administration, has launched a public relations campaign to defend its federally-funded research. 

Starting with its homepage — Harvard.edu — which, in recent weeks, has undergone a drastic makeover. The page, now titled “Research Powers Progress,” is entirely dedicated to information regarding the school’s research feats, from helping stroke victims regain mobility to lowering the cost of prescription drugs. The school reports that Harvard researchers developed more than 400 innovations and issued some 155 patents in the 2024 fiscal year. 

“Research at Harvard — from medicine to technology to education and business — touches countless lives, moving us closer to disease cures, next-generation technology, and a more secure future for millions of people,” the site reads. 

The revamped webpage also highlights what projects will be on the chopping block as a result of the government’s funding freeze. Under the headline “What’s at Risk,” the university laments that federal funding cuts will force researchers to halt life-saving projects in fields like cancer, heart disease, neurodegenerative disease, obesity and diabetes, and others. 

Harvard’s online campaign comes as the university gears up for a costly battle against the administration amid its crackdown on campus antisemitism and liberal bias in higher education. Last week, the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university became the first to reject a list of demands set out by the government, putting $9 billion in federal funding in limbo.

The proposals — that were later rejected — were issued by the government in two rounds. First, the school was instructed to impose reforms similar to those which had been handed to its Ivy League peer, Columbia University, a few weeks prior. Such changes included banning masking during protests, enforcing existing disciplinary policies, and dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, among others. 

A few days later, however, the administration expanded its list of reforms, calling on Harvard to audit its academic programs and departments and to reform those that “fuel antisemitic harassment or reflect ideological capture.” The government also directed Harvard to monitor and manage the “viewpoint diversity” of the student body and the faculty, among other additional demands.

Just 72 hours after the university received the augmented list of demands, Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, chided the reforms for exceeding the limits of the government’s power to revoke funding act and for violating Harvard’s First Amendment Rights. 

“The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Harvard’s lawyers wrote in a letter to the government. “Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government.” 

The administration viewed Mr. Garber’s defiance as demonstrating “the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges — that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws,” the federal antisemitism task force said in a statement. The government subsequently put a freeze on $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60 million in contracts to the university — a fraction of the $9 billion that the administration is currently reviewing. 

In a dramatic twist, it was later reported that the second, more onerous list of demands had actually been sent to the university by mistake. The letter, which was issued by the White House on April 11, should not have been sent and was “unauthorized,” two sources told the New York Times. Some sources claimed that it had been sent prematurely, while others thought that it was supposed to be circulated among the antisemitism task force members, not directed to the university. The White House responded to the Times’ report by defending the contents of the letter. 

Harvard’s revamped website includes links to all of the letters sent by the administration as well as Mr. Garber’s defiant response. The university also posted numerous op-eds written in defense of the school’s decision, from “Harvard Had No Choice,” published in the Chronicle of Higher Education, to “What Harvard Has Set the Stage For,” by the New York Times’ editorial board. 

In the meantime, other universities are taking up similar campaigns. Johns Hopkins University and Cornell University have both updated their homepages to showcase the importance of their research programs.