哈佛大学反击川普政府函（中文）

[丹奇]

2025年4月14日
通过电子邮件发送

Josh Gruenbaum
联邦采购服务署署长
美国总务管理局

Sean R. Keveney
代理总法律顾问
美国卫生与公众服务部

Thomas E. Wheeler
代理总法律顾问
美国教育部

尊敬的Gruenbaum、Keveney和Wheeler先生：

我们是哈佛大学的法律代表。现就贵方于2025年4月11日致哈佛大学校长Alan Garber博士及哈佛董事会资深成员Penny Pritzker女士的信函回复如下。

哈佛大学致力于打击校园内的反犹主义及其他一切形式的偏见。反犹主义和任何形式的歧视行为不仅可憎，且与哈佛的价值观背道而驰，更对其学术使命构成威胁。

为此，哈佛已并将继续实施长期、强有力的结构性、政策性和项目性改革，以确保大学为所有学生提供一个包容、支持的学习环境，并在所有学术项目和运作中全面遵守联邦法律，同时致力于在一个多元化社区中维护开放探究、反对恐吓、鼓励挑战正统观念的氛围，无论这些正统观念来自何方。

在过去15个月中，哈佛已采取一系列重大政策和项目举措。大学修改了校园使用政策，制定了新的问责程序，对违反校规者实施了实质性纪律处分，强化了反偏见、促进思想多元与文明对话的项目，招聘了相关人员支持学生与项目运行，调整了合作关系，拨款支持打击仇恨与偏见，并提升了校园安全与保安措施。因此，哈佛如今的环境与一年前相比已有显著改善。这些努力，以及大学即将采取的更多反对反犹主义的举措，不仅符合正义原则，也对加强哈佛社区包容、人人皆可发展的目标至关重要。

遗憾的是，贵方信中未能认可哈佛所做的努力，反而提出了一些要求，违背《第一修正案》并侵犯了美国最高法院早已确认的大学自主权。贵方的要求还规避了哈佛依据法规所享有的法定权利，提出了未经过国会设立且法律所要求的正式程序确认的所谓损害，并强行要求哈佛采取无根据且具有干扰性的补救措施。更令人反感的是，贵方于2025年3月31日信函中首次明确表示，若哈佛不接受这些条件，将面临失去数十亿美元关键联邦资助的风险，而这些资助对哈佛开展重要科研和创新至关重要，这些科研成果已挽救并改善了无数生命，并使哈佛在国家医学、科研等领域发挥了全球标杆作用。这些要求不仅针对哈佛，还涉及一些依法独立设立和运营的附属医学和科研机构，这些机构正致力于为患者开展拯救生命的工作。哈佛大学不会放弃其独立性，也不会放弃其宪法权利。哈佛，或任何一所私立大学，都不能容许自己沦为联邦政府的附庸。因此，哈佛无法接受贵方提出的“原则性协议”条款。

哈佛仍愿意与贵方进行对话，分享学校已采取及即将采取的举措，以改善所有成员的校园体验。但哈佛不会接受超越本届政府或任何政府合法权限范围之外的要求。

此致
敬礼！

William A. Burck
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan 律师事务所
华盛顿特区 I街1300号 第九层

Robert K. Hur
King & Spalding 律师事务所
宾夕法尼亚大道1700号
华盛顿特区 20006

英文原文：

April 14, 2025
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Josh Gruenbaum
Commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service
General Services Administration

Sean R. Keveney
Acting General Counsel
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

Thomas E. Wheeler
Acting General Counsel
U.S. Department of Education

Dear Messrs. Gruenbaum, Keveney, and Wheeler:

We represent Harvard University. We are writing in response to your letter dated April 11,
2025, addressed to Dr. Alan Garber, Harvard’s President, and Penny Pritzker, Senior Fellow of the
Harvard Corporation.

Harvard is committed to fighting antisemitism and other forms of bigotry in its community.
Antisemitism and discrimination of any kind not only are abhorrent and antithetical to Harvard’s
values but also threaten its academic mission.
To that end, Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural, policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.

Over the past 15 months, Harvard has undertaken substantial policy and programmatic
measures. It has made changes to its campus use policies; adopted new accountability procedures;
imposed meaningful discipline for those who violate university policies; enhanced programs
designed to address bias and promote ideological diversity and civil discourse; hired staff to
support these programs and support students; changed partnerships; dedicated resources to combat hate and bias; and enhanced safety and security measures. As a result, Harvard is in a very different place today from where it was a year ago. These efforts, and additional measures the university
will be taking against antisemitism, not only are the right thing to do but also are critical to
strengthening Harvard’s community as a place in which everyone can thrive.

It is unfortunate, then, that your letter disregards Harvard’s efforts and instead presents
demands that, in contravention of the First Amendment, invade university freedoms long
recognized by the Supreme Court. The government’s terms also circumvent Harvard’s statutory
rights by requiring unsupported and disruptive remedies for alleged harms that the government has
not proven through mandatory processes established by Congress and required by law. No less
objectionable is the condition, first made explicit in the letter of March 31, 2025, that Harvard
accede to these terms or risk the loss of billions of dollars in federal funding critical to vital research
and innovation that has saved and improved lives and allowed Harvard to play a central role in making our country’s scientific, medical, and other research communities the standard-bearers for
the world.

These demands extend not only to Harvard but to separately incorporated and independently operated medical and research hospitals engaging in life-saving work on behalf of their patients. The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle.

Harvard remains open to dialogue about what the university has done, and is planning to do, to improve the experience of every member of its community. But Harvard is not prepared to agree to demands that go beyond the lawful authority of this or any administration.

William A. Burck
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
1300 I Street NW Suite 900 Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005

Robert K. Hur
King & Spalding LLP
1700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20006

翻译：ChatGPT
编辑：林胥