Trump Targets Harvard Again Over International Students After Court Blocks Administration’s
Former President Donald Trump has once again taken aim at Harvard University, just days after a federal judge halted his administration’s efforts to revoke the institution’s ability to enroll international students.
Posting on Truth Social Sunday, Trump criticized the presence of international students at Harvard, claiming their home countries are "not at all friendly to the United States" and that they "pay NOTHING toward their student's education." He added that the administration wants to know "who those foreign students are," accusing Harvard of lacking transparency.
Harvard declined NPR’s request for comment on the matter Sunday morning.
This latest criticism follows a federal judge’s decision on Friday to temporarily block the administration's move to strip Harvard of its ability to accept international students. The university had argued in court that the administration's actions were a "blatant violation of the First Amendment" and an attempt to coerce Harvard into changing its governance, academic programs, and campus ideologies.
In April, the federal government froze more than $2.2 billion in grants and contracts to Harvard after the university refused to comply with administration demands involving hiring practices and admissions policies.
Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the revocation, stating that Harvard was being held accountable for "fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus."
But U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs issued a temporary restraining order, preventing the administration from enforcing the measure. In response, Harvard President Alan Garber called the ruling "a critical step to protect the rights and opportunities of our international students and scholars, who are vital to the University's mission and community."
International students currently make up approximately 27% of Harvard's student population, though most are not eligible for federal financial aid.
Trump's Crackdown on Harvard Sends Shockwaves Through Higher Education
The Trump administration’s abrupt move to revoke Harvard University’s certification to enroll international students has sent alarm across the higher education landscape, raising concerns that similar actions could target other institutions next.
College leaders nationwide expressed alarm that one federal order could suddenly disrupt international enrollment — a cornerstone of many universities’ academic strength and financial stability. “This is a grave moment,” wrote Sally Kornbluth, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Wendy Hensel, president of the University of Hawaii, described the situation as “reverberating across higher education.”
The Department of Homeland Security said Harvard lost access to the Student and Exchange Visitor Program for failing to comply with federal demands, including turning over records related to student protests going back five years.
To many, the decision reflects a growing willingness by President Trump to use immigration status as leverage over universities, especially those viewed as bastions of liberal ideology or diversity initiatives. Trump has already launched investigations, frozen grants, and attempted to deport foreign students this year — all under the stated goal of curbing antisemitism on campuses.
“While Harvard is the victim of the moment, this is a warning shot,” said John Aubrey Douglass, a senior fellow at UC Berkeley. “It’s an unprecedented attempt by a hostile federal government to erode university autonomy.”
Though a federal judge temporarily blocked the order on Friday, the move itself could deter prospective international students, already wary of political instability in the U.S.
A Chilling Message for Global Talent
International students make up over one million of those enrolled in U.S. colleges — more than double the number in 2000. At elite institutions, their share is much higher: over 30% at NYU, 40% at Columbia, and roughly 25% at Harvard.
These students enrich academic environments, contribute to research, and often remain in the U.S. to work, supporting the economy. Yet some conservative critics argue their presence limits opportunities for American students. “More spots are going to foreigners, fewer to Americans,” said Jay P. Greene of the Heritage Foundation.
Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security, defended the revocation, citing safety concerns, especially for Jewish students. She alleged that foreign students participated in recent campus protests involving harassment and violence. “Let this serve as a warning to all universities,” she said.
Still, students like Abdullah Shahid Sial, a Harvard sophomore from Pakistan, say the damage is done. “They wanted us to feel unwelcome,” he said. “They’ve done a pretty good job of that.”
Wider Implications for U.S. Education
Niall Hegarty, a professor at St. John’s University, noted that while international enrollment grew quickly in the early 2000s, it has slowed amid rising hostility. “These students bring global perspective and help U.S. companies operate internationally,” he said.
While some public institutions like the University of California increased international enrollment to offset state budget cuts, elite schools such as Harvard offer need-based aid regardless of nationality. It’s unclear how much revenue international students generate at these schools.
Still, Homeland Security Secretary Noem accused universities of padding their endowments by favoring foreign students. And critics like Greene say that when international enrollment grows too large, it can “dilute American values” on campus.
For some students and education consultants, the message is clear. “This tells the world that Harvard — and by extension the U.S. — may no longer welcome top international talent,” said college admissions counselor Hafeez Lakhani. He added that while this may open doors for domestic applicants, it could hurt the global prestige of American higher education.
Trump Escalates Trade Tensions, Targets EU and Smartphone Giants
.jpg) |
| President Donald Trump speaks to reporters after signing executive orders regarding nuclear energy in the Oval Office of the White House, |
President Donald Trump reignited his global trade war on Friday, announcing steep new tariffs on the European Union and smartphone manufacturers in a move that underscores growing White House frustration over stalled negotiations.
Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump said the U.S. will impose 50% tariffs on EU imports and an additional 25% tariff on phone manufacturers, including Apple and Samsung. The action follows slow progress in trade talks and resistance from both foreign governments and corporations.
“I’m not looking for a deal,” Trump declared. “We’ve set the deal — it’s at 50 percent.”
The president specifically cited Apple for not relocating more of its iPhone manufacturing to the U.S., despite CEO Tim Cook's recent commitments to invest $500 billion domestically.
These abrupt tariff announcements increase pressure on the administration to secure multiple trade agreements before a self-imposed July deadline. While a preliminary deal was reached with the U.K. earlier this month, broader negotiations—particularly with the EU—have stalled.
“Trump is frustrated that the Europeans aren’t rushing to the negotiating table,” said Stephen Moore, an outside economic adviser to the president.
Markets React, EU Pushes Back
Global markets fell sharply following Trump’s comments and Truth Social posts accusing the EU of being “very difficult to deal with.” The EU responded with a warning: any deal must be based on mutual respect, not threats.
“We stand ready to defend our interests,” said EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic, calling the transatlantic trade relationship “unmatched” in scope.
Last year, the U.S. imported $576 billion in goods from the EU and exported $367 billion, creating a trade deficit of $208 billion—a key driver of Trump’s tariff campaign.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent criticized the EU’s approach, claiming many member states are unaware of negotiation details being handled by Brussels.
Fresh Fronts and Domestic Risks
The decision to extend tariffs to other smartphone makers adds a new layer to the ongoing trade war. While Apple initially drew Trump’s ire for shifting production to India, he later broadened the target to include Samsung and other manufacturers.
Despite Cook's efforts to maintain a close relationship with the White House, Trump expressed frustration during a recent trip to the Middle East:
“Tim, you’re my friend... but now I hear you’re building all over India. I don’t want you building in India.”
Financial instability caused by the escalating trade war is raising concerns at home. A recent Marquette University Law School poll found only 37% of Americans support Trump’s tariff policies.
The administration has highlighted recent progress in talks with other countries and is hopeful that more deals will follow. But officials have acknowledged that significant new tariffs could return after July 9, when Trump’s tariff pause expires.
“We have 150 countries that want to make a deal,” Trump said recently. “But you’re not able to see that many countries.”
They Came From Different Worlds, Found Love in DC — and Were Tragically Killed Together
Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim’s paths to Washington, DC couldn’t have been more different — he came from Germany, she from Kansas. But they shared a dream: to build peace through diplomacy. At the Israeli Embassy in DC, that dream brought them together. And just as their relationship was set to take the next step, it was heartbreakingly cut short.
On Wednesday night, May 21, the couple was shot and killed as they left an event at the Capital Jewish Museum — a gathering focused on interfaith cooperation and humanitarian aid.
A Diplomatic Love Story
Lischinsky, 30, had been working in the political section of the Israeli Embassy for over two years. He was born in Germany, moved to Israel as a teenager, and studied international relations and Asian studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Known as thoughtful, kind, and driven, he aspired to become a diplomat — a dream just beginning to take shape.
Milgrim, 26, had arrived in DC to pursue a master’s degree at American University. After volunteering with a peace initiative in Israel called Tech2Peace, she joined the embassy following the October 2023 Hamas attacks. Her role focused on organizing delegations to Israel and building bridges through shared cultural and political experiences.
Their colleagues watched their love story unfold. “It was the cutest love story,” one Israeli official told CNN. “Like a Netflix rom-com.”
Lischinsky had even purchased a ring and was planning to propose in Jerusalem on an upcoming trip. The ambassador of Israel to the US, Yechiel Leiter, confirmed the plan, describing the couple as “beautiful souls, deeply committed to peace.”
Remembering Yaron
Friends and mentors described Lischinsky as a man of quiet strength and deep purpose. A top student at Hebrew University, he had a passion for diplomacy and photography. His former professor, Nissim Otmazgin, said Yaron “symbolized the hope of Israel — idealistic, globally minded, and committed to doing good.”
He held dual citizenship — German and Israeli — and straddled both identities with pride. A friend from Reichman University called him “a man of purpose” who believed in the Abraham Accords and worked tirelessly for peace in the region.
Remembering Sarah
Milgrim, raised in Overland Park, Kansas, had long been involved in Jewish community life. As a student leader at the University of Kansas Hillel, she was inspired to blend environmentalism, diplomacy, and advocacy.
During her volunteer year at Tech2Peace, she facilitated dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians in the tech sector. Her peers remember her as curious, compassionate, and fully present. “She gave people her full attention,” said one colleague. “She didn’t just come to work — she became part of the community.”
After returning to DC, Milgrim began working at the embassy. Meredith Jacobs, CEO of Jewish Women International, recalled how Milgrim lost friends over her decision to work for the Israeli government. Still, she stood firm in her beliefs.
“She found community, she found purpose — and she found love,” Jacobs wrote in a letter to members of her organization. “The world has lost the lives they would have lived and the difference they would have made.”
Two Israeli Embassy Staff Killed Near Jewish Museum in Washington, DC
 |
| Police officers work at the site where officials say two Israeli embassy staff members were killed near the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC |
Two staff members from the Israeli Embassy in Washington, DC, were shot and killed Wednesday night near the Capital Jewish Museum, according to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem.
Metropolitan Police Chief Pamela Smith stated that the suspect, identified as 30-year-old Elias Rodriguez from Chicago, was seen pacing outside the museum before approaching a group of four and opening fire. He then entered the museum, where security detained him. Authorities recovered the weapon after Rodriguez revealed its location. While in custody, he reportedly chanted “Free, Free Palestine.”
The victims were a young couple affiliated with the embassy. Israeli Ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, said the male victim had purchased an engagement ring days prior, intending to propose in Jerusalem.
Israeli Embassy spokesperson Tal Naim Cohen confirmed the victims were shot at close range while attending an event at the museum. The ambassador was not present during the attack.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi and acting DC Attorney Jeanine Pirro arrived on the scene shortly after. Bondi confirmed she had spoken with President Trump multiple times throughout the evening.
“This despicable act of hatred and antisemitism must end,” Trump posted online. “Condolences to the families of the victims.”
Israeli President Isaac Herzog echoed the sentiment, calling the attack “a devastating act of antisemitic violence.” The U.S. and Israel, he said, stand united in defending shared values.
The American Jewish Committee, which was hosting the event, said in a statement: “We are devastated by this tragedy. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families.”
The investigation remains ongoing.
Corey O’Connor Defeats Incumbent Ed Gainey in Pittsburgh Democratic Primary
Corey O’Connor scored a significant political upset Tuesday, defeating incumbent Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey in the Democratic primary, a race shaped by debates over city finances, affordable housing, and public safety.
With Pittsburgh historically voting Democratic in mayoral races—having not elected a Republican in nearly 100 years—O’Connor is now the clear favorite to win the general election this November.
Currently serving as Allegheny County controller, O’Connor is the son of former Pittsburgh mayor Bob O’Connor and had secured the endorsement of the local Democratic Party over Gainey.
Gainey, Pittsburgh’s first Black mayor and a prominent voice from the progressive wing of the party, rose to power in 2021 and positioned himself as a champion of everyday residents. He frequently clashed with Republican leaders, particularly during the Trump administration, and campaigned as a mayor who would “fight for the people.”
O’Connor, however, sharply criticized Gainey’s leadership, accusing him of mismanaging the city’s budget, failing to address a shortage in affordable housing, and lacking a plan to rejuvenate the downtown economy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the steel industry’s decline. He also raised concerns about public safety and deteriorating city infrastructure, pointing to the breakdown of essential vehicles like snow plows and ambulances.
In contrast, Gainey pointed to a strong economy during his term, claimed credit for holding the line on taxes, and noted a decline in crime. He also blamed previous administrations for ongoing challenges.
O’Connor garnered support from developers and business groups, especially amid tensions surrounding Gainey’s housing strategy. His campaign, along with allied organizations, significantly outspent Gainey’s camp, which was backed by progressive groups like the Working Families Party and the SEIU.
Yet, support from unions was divided, and many housing advocates criticized Gainey for falling short on promises. O’Connor framed the city as on the brink of a financial crisis that could threaten public services, saying in a May 8 debate:
“That financial crisis is going to impact each and every one of us. It’s going to stop our ability to fill in potholes, to buy new ambulances, to keep our community safe.”
He accused Gainey of steering the city toward decline and pledged to reverse course.
Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner Wins Democratic Primary
Elsewhere in Pennsylvania, incumbent Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner secured a primary win against challenger Pat Dugan, a former head judge of the city’s municipal court and U.S. Army veteran.
Krasner, who has faced impeachment efforts from Republican lawmakers and sustained attacks from former President Donald Trump, is known for his progressive approach to criminal justice reform. First elected in 2017, his platform includes opposition to the death penalty, eliminating cash bail, and ending mass incarceration.
Recently, Krasner has emphasized public safety, highlighting falling crime rates and new crime-solving technologies. He’s maintained that his office aggressively targets violent crime while continuing broader reform efforts.
Dugan attempted to paint Krasner as soft on crime, nicknaming him “Let ’em Go Larry,” and criticized him for hiring inexperienced prosecutors. He claimed Krasner had failed to deliver on meaningful reform or improved safety.
Both candidates referenced Trump during the campaign. Krasner portrayed himself as a bulwark against the former president and conservative interests, saying in one ad:
“They can come for Philly, but I’m not backing down.”
Dugan, meanwhile, warned that the city faced a triple threat: crime, injustice, and “a president bent on destruction.”
With primary victories in hand, both O’Connor and Krasner are now poised to carry their party’s momentum into November’s general elections.
Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Proceed With Rollback of Deportation Protections for Venezuelans
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Trump administration to move forward with plans to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for potentially hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan nationals, marking a major shift in U.S. immigration policy.
In a brief and unsigned order, the court declined to block the administration’s decision, allowing efforts to dismantle the humanitarian protection to proceed. Immigration advocates say the move will place many Venezuelan migrants at risk of deportation.
The decision was sharply criticized by immigrant rights groups. Ahilan Arulanantham, co-director of UCLA’s Center for Immigration Law and Policy, called it “the largest single action stripping any group of noncitizens of immigration status in modern U.S. history.”
The ruling, however, stopped short of addressing whether the administration could rescind work authorizations and other benefits granted under the TPS program, particularly those extended during President Biden’s tenure. The ambiguity leaves many questions unanswered about how the decision will impact the roughly 300,000 Venezuelans currently under TPS, and an additional 250,000 set to lose protections in September.
The case now heads to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which will review the legality of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s actions to revoke TPS. Opponents argue the rollback violated federal administrative law and was motivated by political and racial bias.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only member of the court to publicly note her dissent.
TPS was initially granted to Venezuelans in March 2021 under the Biden administration due to escalating political and economic instability. The protections were extended again in 2023, just weeks before Biden left office. Monday’s Supreme Court ruling pertains specifically to that 2023 extension.
Attorneys involved in the case criticized the high court’s decision for its lack of clarity. “The Supreme Court didn’t explain why it issued the order,” said Jessica Bansal, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs. Arulanantham echoed the sentiment, describing the two-paragraph ruling as “impossible to understand.”
Earlier this year, Secretary Noem moved to terminate TPS for Venezuelans, with deportation protections set to end in April for hundreds of thousands. A separate group of about 250,000 Venezuelans who arrived before 2023 are also scheduled to lose their status in the coming months.
In March, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen temporarily blocked the administration’s move, citing Venezuela’s dire conditions — including civil unrest, poor health infrastructure, and arbitrary enforcement of laws — as reason enough to uphold the protections.
The TPS program, established by Congress in 1990, is intended to shield migrants from deportation if returning to their home countries would pose significant dangers due to war, natural disaster, or humanitarian crises.
At the close of Trump’s previous term, the administration acknowledged Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis and offered a separate, more limited form of relief. This latest court ruling represents a significant policy reversal.
