Harvard Explores New Center for Conservative Scholarship Amid Trump Attacks

The Ivy League school has discussed an effort to ‘support viewpoint diversity’ with potential donors, says it ‘will not be partisan’.



The Wall Street Journal

By Douglas Belkin, Juliet Chung, Emily Glazer, Natalie Andrews

July 10, 2025


Harvard leaders have discussed creating a program that people briefed on the talks described as a center for conservative scholarship, possibly modeled on Stanford’s Hoover Institution, as the school fights the Trump administration’s accusations that it is too liberal.


The idea has circulated at the university for several years but gained steam after pro-Palestinian protests began disrupting campus in late 2023. Harvard has discussed the effort with potential donors, people familiar with the matter said. The cost of creating such a center could run somewhere between $500 million and $1 billion, a person familiar with Harvard’s thinking estimated.


A spokesman for Harvard said an initiative under discussion “will ensure exposure to the broadest ranges of perspectives on issues, and will not be partisan, but rather will model the use of evidence-based, rigorous logic and a willingness to engage with opposing views.” He added that the school has been accelerating efforts to set up the initiative, which would “promote and support viewpoint diversity.”


A 2024 survey by Harvard found that only one-third of the college’s graduating class felt comfortable discussing controversial topics, and a 2023 survey by the student newspaper found that just 3% of faculty at Harvard College identified as politically conservative.


Harvard President Alan Garber helped promote an “intellectual vitality” program to reinvigorate debate on campus and ensure students engage in discussions free of self-censorship.


Garber faces a delicate challenge in squaring off against President Trump: Any changes the university makes that could be perceived as bowing to the president would face blowback by large groups of faculty, alumni and students, but Trump has many levers to pull to inflict damage on the school.


Harvard has been battling the Trump administration for months over the school’s federal funding and autonomy, after the government accused it of tolerating antisemitism and promoting what the White House views as discriminatory diversity, equity and inclusion practices. The administration has pulled or frozen billions of dollars in federal funding, threatened the school’s tax-exempt status and targeted its ability to enroll international students.

Harvard has sued. A court hearing is scheduled for later this month.


The broader negotiations between the Trump administration and Harvard have hit repeated snags, delaying any settlement, people familiar with the matter said. Harvard is reviewing a new proposal from the administration after the White House deemed an earlier offer from the school a nonstarter, one of the people said.


Decision-making around admissions and faculty have been points of tension, with Harvard resistant to ceding authority on which types of students it admits, the faculty it hires and what professors teach, according to people briefed on the discussions. 


The Trump administration would view the creation of a new institute as window-dressing and wouldn’t see it as a meaningful part of their negotiations, said a person familiar with the administration’s views.


“We’re negotiating hard, I think we’re getting close to having it happen, it’s not wrapped up as fast as I wanted it to, but we’re getting there,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said at a Tuesday cabinet meeting while discussing the status of the administration’s continuing talks with Harvard and Columbia University, whose board has been discussing terms of a possible deal.


The idea of creating a center that would encourage a range of viewpoints has been considered at Harvard for years. 


Before he stepped down from running Harvard Business School in 2020, then-Dean Nitin Nohria discussed creating such an institute with several prospective donors, said people familiar with his efforts. Harvard Provost John Manning is helping to lead the current effort and has discussed the idea with some donors who could help fund the effort.


Some members of the Harvard Corporation, Harvard’s governing body, view the center idea as not unreasonable and as one that could foster a diversity of viewpoints while maintaining Harvard’s independence, said a person familiar with their thinking.


During his campaign, Trump vowed to rein in progressive ideas on elite college campuses, which he said amounted to a “Marxist assault on our American heritage and Western civilization itself.”


Central to changing campus culture is controlling who is hired and what they teach. Harvard President Garber has said the school won’t cede that authority. An institute would open the possibility of hiring new faculty focused on classically liberal ideas which, on many of today’s campuses, are often read as conservative. Those ideas, in turn, could reinvigorate debate, which even Harvard administrators say has atrophied.


The Hoover Institution, which resides on Stanford’s campus and champions free markets and small government, dates back decades. Academic institutes elsewhere devoted to civics, American history and Western civilization began popping up, mostly at public universities in red states, about a decade ago.


They are generally nonpartisan and champion classic liberalism rooted in the study of Western civilization. In some instances, Republican legislatures doled out money to schools to create programs as a counterweight to what they saw as liberal faculty.


Arizona State University launched its School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership in 2016. Founding director Paul Carrese said there are now more than a dozen centers on public university campuses and several more at private schools.


At the University of Florida’s Hamilton School of Classical and Civic Education, University of North Carolina’s School of Civic Life and Leadership and Yale University’s Center for Civic Thought, students read classic texts, apply lessons to current problems and hash out differences in small group discussions.

“This is a national reform movement,” Carrese said. 


Write to Douglas Belkin at Doug.Belkin@wsj.com, Juliet Chung at Juliet.Chung@wsj.com, Emily Glazer at Emily.Glazer@wsj.com and Natalie Andrews at natalie.andrews@wsj.com


Read More

Where Liberty and Learning Endure

June 29, 2026
As America commemorates 250 years of independence, we reflect on the enduring principles of liberty and learning that have defined Davidson College for nearly two centuries.

Bankruptcy and Higher Education

June 21, 2026
By Todd Zywicki The Wall Street Journal June 21, 2026 Auburn University is known for its agricultural and STEM programs, its flight school and athletic programs. But the land-grant university recently became notable for another reason: The board of trustees is taking control of the school back from its faculty. The board began seizing the university’s academic programs—including curriculum, course offerings, degree requirements and academic credentials—at its June 5 meeting. The board also dissolved the faculty senate and replaced it with an advisory council to the president, which includes two faculty members from each of the university’s colleges and additional members appointed by the president. The board’s assertion of authority mirrors incoming mandates by the Alabama Legislature restricting the role of faculty senates in the state’s public university system. Predictably, Auburn’s faculty has responded with howls of outrage, decrying these intrusions on the faculty’s authority over academic operations. How could outsiders appointed through a political process have the expertise to make such delicate decisions? I’ve been a professor at a state university for almost 30 years, and I am sympathetic up to a point. But before becoming a professor I was a bankruptcy lawyer. And bankruptcy law teaches an important lesson for how academia can respond to this moment. Bankruptcy gives businesses an opportunity to admit mistakes, reform and emerge stronger. Successful enterprises don’t need bankruptcy lawyers. But when an enterprise loses its way, it goes into receivership. Most universities aren’t financially bankrupt but have lost their mission and direction. Society has long recognized certain institutions’ authority to manage their own affairs. Two notable examples are licensed professionals—such as doctors and lawyers—and universities. Universities, even state universities, have run their enterprises with minimal external oversight. Faculties enjoyed substantial rights of self-governance because they committed to higher standards than those required by ordinary jobs. Professors would establish and maintain standards of scholarly integrity, freedom of speech and inquiry, and rigorous dedication to merit-based assessment of research in specialized areas. They policed their own house, enforcing norms of truth-seeking, maintaining scholarly integrity and rigor, and ensuring that students emerged with basic knowledge, employable skills and civic competency. But over the past several decades, commitment to those values collapsed. Surveys by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression consistently reveal fear among students and faculty around expressing unfashionable ideas. Universities have seen shout-downs, cancellations and even violence against speakers. Merit and quality yielded to “diversity” and “equity.” Truth-seeking has been displaced by faddish theories and ideologically charged teaching and research. Professors design esoteric departments and teach niche classes to cliques of activist students while the needs of other students and taxpayers for real education go unaddressed. Like companies I represented, universities have lost their way. And many have proved either unable or unwilling to self-correct. When that happens, it is appropriate to put institutions into receivership until they reform and rededicate themselves to their mission. At Auburn incoming students must now take certain required civics and history courses to master basic competency in U.S. history and government. To ensure the classes actually meet that objective, professors will have to make their syllabi publicly available. In the classroom, instructors will be expected to stick to the matter at hand and avoid free-ranging political punditry. Just as other companies can learn from the ones that go bankrupt, other institutions of higher education can learn something from Auburn: Fix what’s broken, or someone else might fix it for you. Mr. Zywicki is a professor at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School. He was a Dartmouth College trustee, 2005-09. https://www.wsj.com/opinion/bankruptcy-and-higher-education-4c2b178e

Race Preferences Are Falling Nationwide

June 19, 2026
By the Editorial Board The Wall Street Journal June 19, 2026 The Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against racial preferences is turning out to be a landmark with profound consequences as its influence spreads. On Thursday the famously progressive Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a state program that issued scholarships based on race violates the U.S. Constitution. Justice Annette Ziegler wrote for the court that the Constitution requires “that every person ‘must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race,’” and that the state cannot “use race as a factor in affording educational opportunities among its citizens.” That must have been painful for the activist liberal majority on the court. In a concurrence, Wisconsin Chief Justice Jill Karofsky took some shots at Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College (2023) before acknowledging that “I am bound by the precedent set forth in SFFA” and other Supreme Court rulings “when interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment.” The case was brought by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty against a 1985 Badger State law that reserved need-based scholarships through a grant program for “Black American,” “American Indian,” “Hispanic” and some Southeast Asian undergraduate students enrolled in Wisconsin’s private and technical colleges. Last week the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a scholarship program earmarked for black University of Iowa students studying physical sciences was “impracticable” under SFFA. State governments would be wise to repeal these discriminatory grant programs, or the courts will do it for them.
Show More