(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Trump expects negative decision on Harvard case [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2025-07-21

There are three cases against the Trump administration by Harvard. This one is American Association of University Professors - Harvard Chapter v. United States Department of Justice. It's being heard by Judge Allison Dale Burroughs. She was appointed by President Barack Obama. As a result, Trump thinks he's already lost.

The judge was hearing arguments for a summary judgment. She called the government's claim "mind-boggling." "Don't you have to show each researcher is anti-semitic, instead of a blanket statement: Harvard is anti-semitic?" This is the basis of Trump's case. Funds should be withheld from Harvard because the college is anti-semitic. It's amazing how quickly Trump got the news.

Part 1.

"The Harvard case was just tried in Massachusetts before an Obama appointed judge. She is a total DISASTER, which I say even before her Ruling."

Well, that doesn't seem really fair. You're judging her before she has judged you. We'll just skip over how a judge is a total disaster, because it's once again projection by Trump.

"She has taken over the various Harvard cases, and is an automatic 'loss' for the People of our Country."

Well, that's a lie. The other two cases are two totally different judges. Four Pinocchio's for Donald.

"Harvard has $52 Billion Dollars in the Bank, and yet they are anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-America."

And what exactly does money in the bank have to do with those three accusations? Trump, once again, uses the dollar sign in front of the number and then says dollars later so he's saying dollars dollars. Is he saying that if you've got money in the bank, you don't need any more and you can afford to be anti-semitic, anti-Christian and anti-American? Or is it that that Trump believes they only get endowments by not being any one of the three? He does say things on a regular basis that confuse me.

"Much of this money comes from the U.S.A., all to the detriment of other Schools, Colleges, and Institutions and we are not going to let this unfair situation to happen any longer."

Well, that's an obvious threat. Just how do you plan to not let it happen anymore? There's no possible legal way to stop somebody from giving money to Harvard, so are you going to try an illegal way once again?

Part 2.

"How did this Trump-hating Judge get these cases?"

It's called the luck of the draw, Donald. You got lucky in Florida when Judge Aileen Cannon got your classified documents case. You should shut up about how judges get assigned. Christ, you appointed her. You can't appoint every single judge. Although you'd like to. That's the only way to keep your ass out of jail.

"When she rules against us, we will IMMEDIATELY appeal, and WIN."

No, I don't think so. When somebody wins a summary judgment, that leaves the framework for any further appeals. If it was forced to go to a jury, that would be different, but it looks like you're losing on face value.

"Also, the Government will stop the practice of giving Billions of Dollars to Harvard, much of which has been given without explanation."

Umm, Donald. The money is what this case is all about. You lose and you still have to give the grant research money that's been allotted. If you stop a practice which has been done for decades, they can sue you again for stopping the practice because you have already lost this case.

"It is a long time commitment to Funding Fairness in Education, and the Trump Administration will not stop until there is a VICTORY."

You didn't say a victory for whom. It's really hard for you to declare any commitment to education when you've just destroyed the Department of Education. Isn't this something of an oxymoron? No, wait a minute you're just a moron.

And then his famous third person sign off, which he seems to be doing with increasing frequency.

"Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

The lawyer for Harvard, Steven Lehotsky, said, "This is a blatant, unrepentative violation of the First Amendment," while admitting that anti-semitic incidents had taken place at Harvard, "We're not aware of a single case in six decades where the federal government has terminated research funding" due to allegations of discrimination.

The hearing lasted 2 hours, and the judge peppered the government's lawyers with questions at length.

Lehotsky added, "It's the Constitutional third rail, or it should be, for the government to insist that it can engage in viewpoint discrimination."

You can't tell people what they can think, or what they can teach. That's what this is all about. The crusade against anti-semitism is just a cover. If the Justice Department wants to eliminate anti-semitism, they should go and ask Donald Trump why he used the term "shylock" the other day.

The courtroom was so packed with lawyers, journalists and spectators, that Robert Hur, one of the lawyers for Harvard, and the special counsel in the Biden classified documents case, had to sit in the second row of the gallery.

Trump knows the government's case is on completely shaky ground. The odds are he's going to lose this one. There are two more to lose. One, of course, is on the weapon of discrimination by diversity, equity, and inclusion. So far, that's lost him every single case against law firms, along with First Amendment violations.

Trump better get used to so much losing. The so much winning days in court could be ending. This would be a good start.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/7/21/2334490/-Trump-expects-negative-decision-on-Harvard-case?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/