DOGE is holding Harvard's billions in federal grants hostage: What's happening with the NIH funding?
Harvard University ’s research labs should be bustling with fresh federal funding. Instead, they remain largely frozen, with millions in NIH grants sitting in limbo. According to The Harvard Crimson, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) resumed issuing grant awards in July after a federal court ordered the Trump administration to restore billions in funding. But a little-known White House entity — the Department of Government Efficiency ( DOGE ), quietly blocked Harvard from accessing the funds.
Harvard is stuck while others move
While other universities, like Columbia and Brown, began receiving NIH money after striking multi-million-dollar settlements with the White House, Harvard has drawn down $0 from NIH since April, when the first Trump-era funding cuts began. Even after Judge Allison D. Burroughs’ September ruling ordered the restoration of $2.7 billion in frozen federal grants , Harvard researchers remain unable to access the funds.
This blockade comes through DOGE’s control over the Payment Management System (PMS), the multi-agency platform that tracks and releases federal grants. DOGE’s “Defend the Spend” process adds extra scrutiny to payments, giving officials the power to hold funds if a grant does not align with the administration’s priorities. Columbia and Brown, by contrast, were allowed access only after agreeing to hefty payments to the government, a dynamic that Harvard officials argue amounts to a “hostage situation.”
The scale of the freeze
The magnitude of the funding freeze is staggering:
Source: The Harvard Crimson
In fiscal year 2024, Harvard received $488 million from the NIH — more than 70% of its federal funding. According to The Harvard Crimson, Harvard was awarded over 140 grants within the pool affected by Judge William G. Young’s April ruling, with a combined multi-year value exceeding $60 million. All of it is now caught in the tug-of-war between the courts, the White House, and DOGE.
Uneven treatment of universities
DOGE’s involvement is particularly striking because other universities in similar situations have been treated differently. Northwestern, another school that has not settled with the White House, has seen only partial funding disbursements, while institutions like Princeton continue to receive NIH payments without DOGE interference. Cornell’s main campus is under restriction, but its Weill School of Medicine in New York City has drawn down some funds, demonstrating how DOGE’s micromanagement can be uneven even within a single university.
Legal and political implications
Harvard’s legal team and former federal officials argue that DOGE’s actions could constitute contempt of court. Samuel R. Bagenstos, former general counsel at the Department of Health and Human Services under the Biden administration, told The Harvard Crimson that a DOGE-controlled grant review is not a legal mechanism to evade a federal court order: “They do not have the right to use a grant review process to evade the District Court order.”
A history of White House pressure
The battle over Harvard’s funding dates back to the Trump administration’s early months. After an executive order in January, federal agencies began slashing grants they deemed politically misaligned. By April, more than $2 billion in Harvard funding was frozen. DOGE, established by executive order, ramped up oversight with its “Defend the Spend” process in late April, effectively placing itself between NIH-approved grants and researchers.
While the White House has hinted at ongoing negotiations with Harvard, federal subpoenas, patent investigations, and threats to the University’s accreditation have kept the pressure high. According to The Harvard Crimson, Columbia and Brown were released from similar restrictions only after settling with the government. Harvard’s refusal to settle has left it uniquely vulnerable to DOGE’s intervention, with its funding still caught in bureaucratic limbo despite multiple court rulings in its favor.
What’s next for researchers?
Harvard’s situation highlights a new battlefield in federal research funding: an unelected, executive-aligned entity using procedural controls to influence who gets money, and who doesn’t. As Bagenstos notes, the process “creates an opportunity for manipulation… to reward the administration’s friends and punish its enemies.” For Harvard researchers, the stakes are high: billions in federal support, critical experiments, and the future of some of the country’s leading scientific work remain on hold, while the country watches how the courts, the White House, and DOGE navigate this unprecedented impasse.
Harvard is stuck while others move
While other universities, like Columbia and Brown, began receiving NIH money after striking multi-million-dollar settlements with the White House, Harvard has drawn down $0 from NIH since April, when the first Trump-era funding cuts began. Even after Judge Allison D. Burroughs’ September ruling ordered the restoration of $2.7 billion in frozen federal grants , Harvard researchers remain unable to access the funds.
This blockade comes through DOGE’s control over the Payment Management System (PMS), the multi-agency platform that tracks and releases federal grants. DOGE’s “Defend the Spend” process adds extra scrutiny to payments, giving officials the power to hold funds if a grant does not align with the administration’s priorities. Columbia and Brown, by contrast, were allowed access only after agreeing to hefty payments to the government, a dynamic that Harvard officials argue amounts to a “hostage situation.”
The scale of the freeze
The magnitude of the funding freeze is staggering:
Source: The Harvard Crimson
In fiscal year 2024, Harvard received $488 million from the NIH — more than 70% of its federal funding. According to The Harvard Crimson, Harvard was awarded over 140 grants within the pool affected by Judge William G. Young’s April ruling, with a combined multi-year value exceeding $60 million. All of it is now caught in the tug-of-war between the courts, the White House, and DOGE.
Uneven treatment of universities
DOGE’s involvement is particularly striking because other universities in similar situations have been treated differently. Northwestern, another school that has not settled with the White House, has seen only partial funding disbursements, while institutions like Princeton continue to receive NIH payments without DOGE interference. Cornell’s main campus is under restriction, but its Weill School of Medicine in New York City has drawn down some funds, demonstrating how DOGE’s micromanagement can be uneven even within a single university.
Legal and political implications
Harvard’s legal team and former federal officials argue that DOGE’s actions could constitute contempt of court. Samuel R. Bagenstos, former general counsel at the Department of Health and Human Services under the Biden administration, told The Harvard Crimson that a DOGE-controlled grant review is not a legal mechanism to evade a federal court order: “They do not have the right to use a grant review process to evade the District Court order.”
A history of White House pressure
The battle over Harvard’s funding dates back to the Trump administration’s early months. After an executive order in January, federal agencies began slashing grants they deemed politically misaligned. By April, more than $2 billion in Harvard funding was frozen. DOGE, established by executive order, ramped up oversight with its “Defend the Spend” process in late April, effectively placing itself between NIH-approved grants and researchers.
While the White House has hinted at ongoing negotiations with Harvard, federal subpoenas, patent investigations, and threats to the University’s accreditation have kept the pressure high. According to The Harvard Crimson, Columbia and Brown were released from similar restrictions only after settling with the government. Harvard’s refusal to settle has left it uniquely vulnerable to DOGE’s intervention, with its funding still caught in bureaucratic limbo despite multiple court rulings in its favor.
What’s next for researchers?
Harvard’s situation highlights a new battlefield in federal research funding: an unelected, executive-aligned entity using procedural controls to influence who gets money, and who doesn’t. As Bagenstos notes, the process “creates an opportunity for manipulation… to reward the administration’s friends and punish its enemies.” For Harvard researchers, the stakes are high: billions in federal support, critical experiments, and the future of some of the country’s leading scientific work remain on hold, while the country watches how the courts, the White House, and DOGE navigate this unprecedented impasse.
Next Story