Summary
Harvard vs. Trump: A Wake-Up Call for Federal Grant Recipients
"Lesson for Grant Recipients: Terms and Conditions Apply"
A non-lawyer's breakdown of the legal, political, and contractual layers every grantee should understand.
When Harvard sued the Trump administration over frozen federal research funds, it raised more than eyebrows—it raised questions about how far executive power can go in enforcing compliance through grant terms. At stake? Billions in research dollars, the scope of Executive Order 14173, and the role of Title VI in anti-discrimination enforcement.
Key Takeaway: Your compliance isn't optional if you're a federal grant recipient—university, nonprofit, or research org. Know your clauses. Protect your funding.
A Lesson for Federal Grant Recipients: Terms and Conditions Apply
A Non-lawyer’s Analysis
In a case that resonates with research organizations and educational institutions, Harvard University filed suit against the Trump administration over the withholding of federal grant funds. The dispute’s heart is whether the administration can cut off federal research dollars due to perceived non-compliance with Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunities, and failure to follow Title VI concerning anti-semitism.
The Trump administration has prioritized countering anti-Semitism and eliminating discrimination. The largest tool available to get everyone’s attention is the ability to withhold federal funds from institutions that do not comply with federal regulations, including Executive Orders, Title VI, and other laws, regulations, terms, and conditions of funding awards.
What has unfolded raises a crucial question: Can federal funds be withheld for failure to comply with the Trump Administration’s Executive Orders? Or from another perspective:
The underlying issue is whether the government can exercise its right to terminate funding for cause (non-performance or breach of agreement clauses like Executive orders and Title VI by the institution, and/or for convenience because they want to.
The Lawsuit: A Clash of Perspectives
Harvard’s suit stated the government can’t withhold grant funds because doing so interferes with the institution’s freedom of speech and is political interference. In essence, Harvard argued it had fully complied with all terms of its federal awards, including the critical non-discrimination and eligibility provisions. Yet, Harvard settled two Title VI lawsuits in January 2025 that alleged it failed to protect Jewish students.[i] These settlements support the Trump Administration’s non-compliance argument and perspective.
Furthermore, Harvard asserts that it is unfair to punish the researchers when the institution is the one that has the issue. Guess what? The institution (Harvard) is viewed as a single entity and is the recipient of the funds; ergo, if the hand gets smacked, the body feels the pain.
What’s in a Federal Grant Agreement? More Than You Might Think
Every federal R&D grant (and most other agreements) includes a detailed agreement with general terms and specific statutory requirements. Whether awarded by NSF, NIH, DoD, or other agencies, one element is universal: non-discrimination clauses.
Let’s examine the core clauses typically included in grant agreements that relate directly to an institution’s eligibility and ongoing compliance.
Standard Non-Discrimination Clauses and Agreements in Federal Grants
-
- Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin under any program receiving federal financial assistance.[ii]
- Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires reasonable accommodations in federally funded programs.[iii]
- Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.[iv]
- Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits age discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal funding.[v]
- Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) requires meaningful access to programs by individuals with limited English proficiency.[vi]
- Assurance of Compliance (e.g., HHS Form 690) Grantees must sign this form certifying they will comply with all applicable civil rights laws and regulations.[vii]
Additional Federal GrantClauses Often Found in Award Agreements[viii]
Federal agencies often include contractual clauses that allow for termination for convenience as part of the grant package. These clauses contain language that states:
“The Government may terminate performance of work under this contract in whole or, from time to time, in part if the Contracting Officer determines that a termination is in the Government’s interest.”[ix]
These clauses include:
-
- FAR 52.249-2 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Fixed Price)
- FAR 52.259-5 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Educational and Other Nonprofit Institutions
- FAR 52.249-6 Termination (Cost-Reimbursement)
- FAR 52.249-4 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Services)
Key Takeaway: Grant Compliance Is Your Best Defense
Harvard’s lawsuit underscores a critical point for all federal grantees: recipient organizations must comply with the grant terms. Institutions may choose not to comply with the terms and conditions. If they do, they usually (when caught) lose the funds related to the specific award, at minimum. However, they may also lose eligibility for future opportunities and have to repay funds expended during the non-compliance period (or longer).
Bottom Line: Know Your Clauses, Protect Your Funding
Whether you’re a university, private research lab, nonprofit entity, or small business, understand your obligations under federal grant agreements. Those terms and conditions are contractual, with many non-negotiable clauses. These clauses aren’t simply boilerplate; they are your contractual obligations.
Action Tip: Review your organization’s award documents and grant policies regularly. Ensure everyone in your organization, including legal counsel, compliance officers, and research administrators understand your agreements. Conduct an internal audit for compliance with award-specific terms and the broader institutional requirements.
[i] https://www.harvard.edu/media-relations/2025/01/21/press-release-settlement-harvard-saa
[ii] https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI
[iii] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/section-504-rehabilitation-act-of-1973
[iv] https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/civil-rights-laws/title-ix-and-sex-discrimination
[v] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/regulatory/statutes/age-discrimination-act
[vi] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/08/16/00-20938/improving-access-to-services-for-persons-with-limited-english-proficiency
[vii] https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/aoc/aocContact.jsf
[viii] https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.249
A Lesson for Grant Recipients: Terms and Conditions Apply
A Non-lawyer’s Analysis
In a case that resonates with research organizations and educational institutions, Harvard University filed suit against the Trump administration over the withholding of federal grant funds. The dispute’s heart is whether the administration can cut off federal research dollars due to perceived non-compliance with Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunities, and failure to follow Title VI concerning anti-semitism.
The Trump administration has prioritized countering anti-Semitism and eliminating discrimination. The largest tool available to get everyone’s attention is the ability to withhold federal funds from institutions that do not comply with federal regulations, including Executive Orders, Title VI, and other laws, regulations, terms, and conditions of funding awards.
What has unfolded raises a crucial question: Can federal funds be withheld for failure to comply with the Trump Administration’s Executive Orders? Or from another perspective:
The underlying issue is whether the government can exercise its right to terminate funding for cause (non-performance or breach of agreement clauses like Executive orders and Title VI by the institution, and/or for convenience because they want to.
The Lawsuit: A Clash of Perspectives
Harvard’s suit stated the government can’t withhold grant funds because doing so interferes with the institution’s freedom of speech and is political interference. In essence, Harvard argued it had fully complied with all terms of its federal awards, including the critical non-discrimination and eligibility provisions. Yet, Harvard settled two Title VI lawsuits in January 2025 that alleged it failed to protect Jewish students.[i] These settlements support the Trump Administration’s non-compliance argument and perspective.
Furthermore, Harvard asserts that it is unfair to punish the researchers when the institution is the one that has the issue. Guess what? The institution (Harvard) is viewed as a single entity and is the recipient of the funds; ergo, if the hand gets smacked, the body feels the pain.
What’s in a Federal Grant Agreement? More Than You Might Think
Every federal R&D grant (and most other agreements) includes a detailed agreement with general terms and specific statutory requirements. Whether awarded by NSF, NIH, DoD, or other agencies, one element is universal: non-discrimination clauses.
Let’s examine the core clauses typically included in grant agreements that relate directly to an institution’s eligibility and ongoing compliance.
Standard Non-Discrimination Clauses and Agreements in Federal Grants
- Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin under any program receiving federal financial assistance.[ii]
- Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires reasonable accommodations in federally funded programs.[iii]
- Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.[iv]
- Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits age discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal funding.[v]
- Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) requires meaningful access to programs by individuals with limited English proficiency.[vi]
- Assurance of Compliance (e.g., HHS Form 690) Grantees must sign this form certifying they will comply with all applicable civil rights laws and regulations.[vii]
Additional Clauses Often Found in Award Agreements[viii]
Federal agencies often include contractual clauses that allow for termination for convenience as part of the grant package. These clauses contain language that states:
“The Government may terminate performance of work under this contract in whole or, from time to time, in part if the Contracting Officer determines that a termination is in the Government’s interest.”[ix]
These clauses include:
- FAR 52.249-2 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Fixed Price)
- FAR 52.259-5 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Educational and Other Nonprofit Institutions
- FAR 52.249-6 Termination (Cost-Reimbursement)
- FAR 52.249-4 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Services)
Key Takeaway: Grant Compliance Is Your Best Defense
Harvard’s lawsuit underscores a critical point for all federal grantees: recipient organizations must comply with the grant terms. Institutions may choose not to comply with the terms and conditions. If they do, they usually (when caught) lose the funds related to the specific award, at minimum. However, they may also lose eligibility for future opportunities and have to repay funds expended during the non-compliance period (or longer).
Bottom Line: Know Your Clauses, Protect Your Funding
Whether you’re a university, private research lab, nonprofit entity, or small business, understand your obligations under federal grant agreements. Those terms and conditions are contractual, with many non-negotiable clauses. These clauses aren’t simply boilerplate; they are your contractual obligations.
Action Tip: Review your organization’s award documents and grant policies regularly. Ensure everyone in your organization, including legal counsel, compliance officers, and research administrators understand your agreements. Conduct an internal audit for compliance with award-specific terms and the broader institutional requirements.
[i] https://www.harvard.edu/media-relations/2025/01/21/press-release-settlement-harvard-saa
[ii] https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI
[iii] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/section-504-rehabilitation-act-of-1973
[iv] https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/civil-rights-laws/title-ix-and-sex-discrimination
[v] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/regulatory/statutes/age-discrimination-act
[vi] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/08/16/00-20938/improving-access-to-services-for-persons-with-limited-english-proficiency
[vii] https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/aoc/aocContact.jsf
[viii] https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.249
A Lesson for Grant Recipients: Terms and Conditions Apply
A Non-lawyer’s Analysis
In a case that resonates with research organizations and educational institutions, Harvard University filed suit against the Trump administration over the withholding of federal grant funds. The dispute’s heart is whether the administration can cut off federal research dollars due to perceived non-compliance with Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunities, and failure to follow Title VI concerning anti-semitism.
The Trump administration has prioritized countering anti-Semitism and eliminating discrimination. The largest tool available to get everyone’s attention is the ability to withhold federal funds from institutions that do not comply with federal regulations, including Executive Orders, Title VI, and other laws, regulations, terms, and conditions of funding awards.
What has unfolded raises a crucial question: Can federal funds be withheld for failure to comply with the Trump Administration’s Executive Orders? Or from another perspective:
The underlying issue is whether the government can exercise its right to terminate funding for cause (non-performance or breach of agreement clauses like Executive orders and Title VI by the institution, and/or for convenience because they want to.
The Lawsuit: A Clash of Perspectives
Harvard’s suit stated the government can’t withhold grant funds because doing so interferes with the institution’s freedom of speech and is political interference. In essence, Harvard argued it had fully complied with all terms of its federal awards, including the critical non-discrimination and eligibility provisions. Yet, Harvard settled two Title VI lawsuits in January 2025 that alleged it failed to protect Jewish students.[i] These settlements support the Trump Administration’s non-compliance argument and perspective.
Furthermore, Harvard asserts that it is unfair to punish the researchers when the institution is the one that has the issue. Guess what? The institution (Harvard) is viewed as a single entity and is the recipient of the funds; ergo, if the hand gets smacked, the body feels the pain.
What’s in a Federal Grant Agreement? More Than You Might Think
Every federal R&D grant (and most other agreements) includes a detailed agreement with general terms and specific statutory requirements. Whether awarded by NSF, NIH, DoD, or other agencies, one element is universal: non-discrimination clauses.
Let’s examine the core clauses typically included in grant agreements that relate directly to an institution’s eligibility and ongoing compliance.
Standard Non-Discrimination Clauses and Agreements in Federal Grants
- Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin under any program receiving federal financial assistance.[ii]
- Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires reasonable accommodations in federally funded programs.[iii]
- Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.[iv]
- Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits age discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal funding.[v]
- Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP)) requires meaningful access to programs by individuals with limited English proficiency.[vi]
- Assurance of Compliance (e.g., HHS Form 690) Grantees must sign this form certifying they will comply with all applicable civil rights laws and regulations.[vii]
Additional Clauses Often Found in Award Agreements[viii]
Federal agencies often include contractual clauses that allow for termination for convenience as part of the grant package. These clauses contain language that states:
“The Government may terminate performance of work under this contract in whole or, from time to time, in part if the Contracting Officer determines that a termination is in the Government’s interest.”[ix]
These clauses include:
- FAR 52.249-2 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Fixed Price)
- FAR 52.259-5 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Educational and Other Nonprofit Institutions
- FAR 52.249-6 Termination (Cost-Reimbursement)
- FAR 52.249-4 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Services)
Key Takeaway: Grant Compliance Is Your Best Defense
Harvard’s lawsuit underscores a critical point for all federal grantees: recipient organizations must comply with the grant terms. Institutions may choose not to comply with the terms and conditions. If they do, they usually (when caught) lose the funds related to the specific award, at minimum. However, they may also lose eligibility for future opportunities and have to repay funds expended during the non-compliance period (or longer).
Bottom Line: Know Your Clauses, Protect Your Funding
Whether you’re a university, private research lab, nonprofit entity, or small business, understand your obligations under federal grant agreements. Those terms and conditions are contractual, with many non-negotiable clauses. These clauses aren’t simply boilerplate; they are your contractual obligations.
Action Tip: Review your organization’s award documents and grant policies regularly. Ensure everyone in your organization, including legal counsel, compliance officers, and research administrators understand your agreements. Conduct an internal audit for compliance with award-specific terms and the broader institutional requirements.
[i] https://www.harvard.edu/media-relations/2025/01/21/press-release-settlement-harvard-saa
[ii] https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI
[iii] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/section-504-rehabilitation-act-of-1973
[iv] https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/civil-rights-laws/title-ix-and-sex-discrimination
[v] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/regulatory/statutes/age-discrimination-act
[vi] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/08/16/00-20938/improving-access-to-services-for-persons-with-limited-english-proficiency
[vii] https://ocrportal.hhs.gov/ocr/aoc/aocContact.jsf
[viii] https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.249
