A federal judge has blocked the Education Department from releasing a list of foreign donors who have given up to $5.2 billion to Harvard, Columbia and other top US universities since 2020.
Judge Tanya Chutkan issued the ruling on Thursday, saying disclosure of the confidential information could “constitute irreparable harm.” The order will remain in place for the next 28 days while she considers a more temporary injunction.
The list covers all foreign donors, with so-called non-natural person entities accounting for the vast majority of the $5.2 billion rather than individual donors. An Education Department official described the list as including “a foreign government; this could be a foreign military; this could be a foreign business, could be any of those things” or “an enterprise connected to a university, that’s connected to Chinese intelligence or the PLA.”
The Judge’s Ruling
Chutkan wrote in her five-page order that the disclosure of donor names would be visible “for every internet user to see in posterity.”
She also warned that once published, the information “will likely never escape the public eye. Indeed, the disclosure may produce downstream harms to the safety of donors who live in politically repressive countries.”
The judge ruled the disclosure would likely violate the Administrative Procedure Act.
Who Brought the Suit
The Association of American Universities brought the suit against the Department of Education earlier Thursday. The association represents at least 69 top research universities in the US, including the University of Pennsylvania, Yale University and others.
The AAU objected, claiming the department had been obtaining the identities of individual donors since 2020 during the first Trump administration. An Education Department official said the probe is “a pretext to prevent public transparency about the enterprises that are funneling billions of dollars to lead US universities mainly to do two things.”
The official said the first purpose is to steal intellectual property, and the second is gifts from Arab countries to change what’s taught on US campuses. The official added: “And so they’re funding the anti-Zionist, anti-Western ideology that is really not only dividing campuses but dividing the country.”
The Administration’s Response
An Education Department spokeswoman, Ellen Keast, said the ruling would halt the administration from revealing schools that have been “cashing multi-million-dollar checks from malign foreign actors that fund centers and promote anti-Western ideologies and support partnerships that are designed to export sensitive technology to geopolitical adversaries.”
Keast added: “Now, the ‘premier’ association for American research universities is suing because it is hellbent on avoiding public accountability after decades of insatiable greed and disregard for the national interest.”
The AAU hailed the ruling in a statement, saying if the Trump administration succeeded it “would chill the lawful generosity that supports scholarships, research, and teaching on campuses across the country.”
Timeline of the Probe
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| April 2025 | Education Department officials launched a probe of the University of California-Berkeley over funding it received from China |
| Same month | President Trump signed an executive action to strengthen enforcement of Section 117 of the Higher Education Act |
The law forces US universities to report contracts with or gifts from foreign sources exceeding $250,000 to the Education Department.
What Is at Stake
The dispute pits transparency against privacy. The Education Department argues that Americans have a right to know who is funding US higher education. The universities argue that publication could discourage lawful giving and put donors in dangerous situations.
The judge’s order rests on a narrow legal ground: the Administrative Procedure Act. Her ruling applies only for the next 28 days.
Where This Goes Next
The 28-day window gives Chutkan time to consider whether a more temporary injunction is needed. The AAU has won the first round, but the administration can appeal.
The stakes are high for both sides. For the universities, publication could mean losing donors who fear retaliation. For the administration, secrecy means the public never learns who is funding American campuses.
The case will likely set precedent for how the government handles donor information in the future. It is a test of whether the First Amendment right to know trumps the right to remain anonymous.
The fight is far from over.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs neither the Education Department nor the universities on this list, and instead backs the citizens and local groups pushing back against mass tracking of ordinary people by governments, which is what the release of such a list would amount to. The Education Department’s probe is described as targeting gifts from Arab countries to change what is taught on US campuses, and the list itself includes descriptions of donors tied to Chinese intelligence and the PLA. That is not neutral scrutiny; it is a claim that universities are being funded by foreign adversaries to undermine American interests.
The judge’s order, which blocks the release of donor names for 28 days, rests on the Administrative Procedure Act. The paper agrees with the judge’s reasoning that disclosure could produce irreparable harm, particularly for donors living in politically repressive countries. The ruling protects individual privacy against government overreach.
The paper would want the administration to stop treating universities as conduits for foreign influence and to stop collecting data on individual donors. Instead, it should focus on public reporting of aggregate figures, as required by existing law, without naming names. The reader should watch for the administration’s next move — an appeal, a narrower list, or a retreat — and remember that the fight over donor transparency is far from over.
Source material: “Education Department blocked from releasing list of foreign sources of funding for Ivy League universities,” the New York Post.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.