The controversial situation surrounding the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) and anti-Semitism in higher education may still be dominating the news cycle, but dear reader, the game’s afoot.
 

Yesterday, the Department of Education (ED) announced that involuntary collections on defaulted student loans will begin again and resumed payment plans after a five year hiatus—initially due to COVID-19 and extended because of the Biden administration, placing borrowers in limbo. Borrowers are now back on the hook for their loans, taking the responsibility off of American taxpayers. The National Association of Scholars (NAS) applauds the ED for this action to pull the federal student loan portfolio away from a fiscal cliff. Statistics from ED are staggering: 
 

• Today, 42.7 million borrowers owe more than $1.6 trillion in student debt. 
• More than 5 million borrowers have not made a monthly payment in over 360 days and sit in default—many for more than 7 years—and 4 million borrowers are in late-stage delinquency (91-180 days).
• Only 38 percent of borrowers are in repayment and current on their student loans. 

To effectuate this return to normalcy, the Treasury Offset Program will be restarted under the Office of Federal Student Aid, and the U.S. Department of Treasury will administer the program beginning on May 5, 2025. As part of the larger picture of reforming education and various programs associated with it, NAS has long-suggested that Federal Student Aid be reformed to place colleges and universities on the hook for “50 percent of loans defaulted on by students at their institution.” The current system of student loan “debt slavery” is perpetuated by rising tuition due to corruptive, administrative bloat and greed at institutions, among other reasons. 
 

For now, this is the right step by ED. But more can be done to combat the student debt crisis.
 

Harvard University is still in the hot seat. On Friday, the ED declared it had sent a records request to the university regarding incomplete and inaccurate disclosures of foreign gifts pursuant to Section 117 of the Higher Education Act. Under Section 117, Harvard is required by law to disclose foreign gifts and contracts totaling more than $250,000 in a given calendar year. After the latest ED review revealed discrepancies, Harvard is being asked “to turn over a list of all gifts and grants from all foreign sources, information regarding all expelled foreign students since 2016, information regarding all faculty affiliated with or from a foreign country and those involved in the expulsion of foreign students, among other things.” This must be done within 30 days.
 

NAS has worked hard to bring awareness to flouting of Section 117 by higher education. Through reports and articles, NAS has exposed ties to anti-Western and malign foreign influence, uncovered Confucius Classrooms and Chinese influence, and advocated for lowering the threshold on foreign gift reporting to combat corruption. Colleges and universities who accept foreign funding should be required like Harvard to be transparent.
 

Continuing on the trend of news out of Harvard, in the aftermath of the April 11 letter to the university by the administration, the government has responded swiftly and decisively. As a refresher, $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts were frozen, with another $1 billion being threatened. Harvard sued the Trump administration yesterday to stop the funding freeze. Additionally, last Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminated $2.7 million in DHS grants to the university and threatened to end Harvard’s Student and Visitor Exchange Program certification—effectively barring the enrollment of international students. Now it is rumored that the Internal Revenue Service may be going after Harvard’s tax-exempt status. 
 

What this means for the future of Harvard University and other institutions who fail to comply with anti-DEI measures and condemning anti-Semitic behavior on campus is uncertain. But we know that the current administration is pulling no punches.
 

While Harvard and its bedfellows resist the Trump administration’s reform efforts, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is getting in line with dismantling DEI. On Friday, the NSF released a statement updating its mission and announcing that all awards not aligned with NSF’s mission will be terminated. NSF director, Sethuraman Panchanathan, wrote, “Research projects with more narrow impact limited to subgroups of people based on protected class or characteristics do not effectuate NSF priorities,” signaling a pivot away from past priorities by the nonmedical and engineering-focused agency. This move by the NSF comes after years of “trying to attract more women and racial minorities to STEM professions and to improve scientific media literacy.” Though an exact number of grants and their value was not given, the Department of Government Efficiency posted on X that NSF canceled 402 “wasteful DEI grants,” leading to $233 million in savings. 
 

This higher ed shake up is encouraging. As of now, the NSF is joined by other top science agencies in pulling funding from DEI programs in acquiescence with administration orders. The same can be said for the majority of higher education—sans Harvard and a few other institutions—in at least giving lip service to anti-DEI directives and condemning anti-Semitism. Will this be a lasting change? Or are the changes we see a mere four-year relationship? 
 

Until next week.

About the NAS