A Bolder Alternative, and the Legal Remedy for Northwestern's Funding Freeze
By: Jeremiah Nabors-Moore
Edited by: Lauren Levinson and Devon Gura
On April 8, 2025, the Trump administration leaked that it would freeze $790 million in federal funding to Northwestern University, citing alleged civil-rights violations related to pro-Palestinian encampment protests during the 2023 to 2024 academic year.[1][2] Since then, the administration, as of the writing of this article, has not reached a settlement with Northwestern, and the University has been forced to operate without the frozen funds. This has caused massive layoffs, over 425 positions eliminated, and significant cuts to programs across campus.[3] The shadow of the freeze has left staff and students uncertain about the future of their university. If the school cannot settle, it risks continuing to run without federal funding, which will only result in more research closures and further negative effects on student life. But if Northwestern does settle in order to restore its funding, it risks ceding academic liberties and admitting defeat in the face of such action. Currently the university has decided not to take legal action against the Trump administration; however, when analyzing the success of other institutions in similar situations, it may be more beneficial for the University to engage in a suit than risk compromising its integrity, or simply remaining in freeze limbo. Northwestern has strong legal grounds to challenge the freeze, and a lawsuit is more capable of protecting the University’s autonomy and stability than continued negotiation or inaction.
First, it is important to explain what legal authority the Trump administration has over federal funding. In the 2024 fiscal year, prior to the freeze, Northwestern received $743.4 million in federal research funding, a 5% increase from the previous year. Major portions came from federal agencies: the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided $519,600,000; the National Science Foundation, $90,800,000; the Department of Defense, $60,200,000; the Department of Energy, $30,000,000; the Department of Health and Human Services, $27,000,000; and $15,800,000 from various other federal sources.[4] The remaining portion of the $790 million at issue consisted of previously awarded grants that had not yet been spent. In terms of why Northwestern receives these funds in the first place, federal agencies receive funds from Congress, empowered by the Spending Clause, specifically given to distribute to research institutions. These agencies then distribute the money through a variety of processes, such as grant applications and competitive awards.
A common misconception about the freeze is that the Trump administration issued any public or official notice of the suspension of funds. It did not. The reason for this ties into the legal avenue the administration chose in order to freeze funding. After the press leaked the incoming freeze, the administration issued over 100 stop-work orders on different projects, forcing each to immediately discontinue work and stop spending federal funds.[5] Agencies derive authority for this from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which governs federal procurement.[6] FAR 52.242-15 allows an agency to order a stop for budget issues, administrative concerns, investigations, program reviews, or compliance issues.[7] Such orders can last up to 90 days unless extended. FAR 52.242-15 applies to federal contracts, many of which at Northwestern were with the Department of Defense. However, not all frozen funds fell under FAR 52.242-15 because it does not apply to grants, which constitute a large share of Northwestern’s federal funding.
In addition to stop-work orders, the federal government may have, based on available evidence, relied on 2 CFR 200.340, concerning termination or suspension of federal grants, which allows agencies to halt or end a grant for material noncompliance, for cause, with consent, by court order, or in extraordinary circumstances.[8] This policy derives from Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200), a set of regulations from the Office of Management and Budget governing auditing, administration, and cost principles for federal grants awarded to non-federal entities.[9] Effectively, this is the grant-based equivalent of a stop-work order.
The Trump administration’s decision to use these powers to halt funding is controversial. Critics have raised numerous potential legal conflicts that may contradict the administration’s actions. Many of these arguments stem from the case involving the Trump administration and Harvard, which also saw over $2 billion in federal grant funding frozen.[10] Unlike Northwestern, Harvard sued the administration for misuse of power. From their legal battle, we can derive arguments that may apply to Northwestern’s situation.
But first, two statutes stand out as being incredibly relevant to both Northwestern and Harvards’s case, the APA firstly, and possibly the ICA. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs federal agency rulemaking, prohibits agencies from acting in ways that are “arbitrary or capricious” or that exceed their statutory authority. In practical terms, agencies cannot retract funding without a strong legal basis. If the Trump administration’s justification for freezing funds is merely political, the action would violate the APA.[11] The administration has cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race, as its justification for the freezes at both Harvard and Northwestern. If investigations conclude that the universities violated Title VI, the freeze may be justified; if not, it would almost certainly violate the APA. The administration’s actions may also violate the Impoundment Control Act (ICA), which restricts the executive branch’s ability to withhold funds that Congress has appropriated.[13] The ICA prohibits withholding funds for policy reasons without congressional approval. In both Harvard’s and Northwestern’s cases, the administration neither received nor sought congressional consent for these stop-work orders, which may constitute a violation of the ICA. This raises broader concerns about separation of powers. Congress holds the “power of the purse,” and the president’s unilateral withholding of funds may have infringed upon that constitutional authority.
Harvard’s case began in early 2025, when the Trump administration froze approximately $2.2 billion in federal research funding to Harvard University, citing alleged violations of Title VI related to the university’s handling of pro-Palestinian campus protests. As with Northwestern, the administration issued a combination of FAR 52.242-15 stop-work orders and 2 C.F.R. § 200.340 grant suspensions rather than a formal announcement. Unlike Northwestern, however, Harvard received a written set of demands that tied restoration of funding to sweeping changes in governance, hiring practices, admissions criteria, and campus speech norms. In March 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts struck down the freeze as unlawful, holding that the administration had violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and infringed Harvard’s First Amendment rights. The court enjoined the administration from continuing the freeze. The court found the agency action “arbitrary and capricious” under the APA for three reasons: (1) the administration presented no evidence of Title VI violations; (2) the demands imposed were unrelated to civil-rights enforcement and instead reflected ideological policy goals; and (3) the funding freeze constituted an unconstitutional attempt to coerce Harvard’s institutional speech and governance.[14] The court emphasized that the majority of the administration’s conditions bore “little connection to antisemitism” and instead sought to impose political conformity. Overall Northwestern, unlike Harvard, has not initiated legal action. However, the similarities between the two situations suggest Harvard’s case may foreshadow Northwestern’s potential legal outcome, and although the Trump administration has vowed to appeal, Harvard currently holds the victory. Additional government missteps reinforce concerns about arbitrary motives. During negotiations with UCLA, the administration accidentally issued a draft agreement that referred to “Feinberg School of Medicine,” Northwestern’s medical school, instead of UCLA’s.[15] The error itself is not legally dispositive, but it does illustrate the irregular and haphazard process the administration has used across universities. This kind of procedural sloppiness strengthens the argument that the freezes are being driven by political objectives rather than legitimate Title VI enforcement, echoing the concerns that led the Harvard court to find the freeze “arbitrary and capricious.”
Whether Northwestern would fare the same as Harvard has is uncertain. There are significant similarities between the cases, but also important differences. Most notably, Northwestern never received an official list of demands from the Trump administration. [16] Much of the district court’s reasoning in the Harvard case was based on the administration’s explicit ideological demands. It is unclear whether a court could infer the same intent solely from FAR and CFR orders without accompanying public directives. Yet even if Northwestern’s case differs from Harvard in the absence of explicit demands, the core institutional stakes remain the same. Allowing an administration to maintain a multibillion-dollar freeze without evidence of wrongdoing would set a dangerous precedent for federal control over university governance. Each week of inaction deepens the harm: budget cuts, halted research, and deteriorating faculty recruitment all increase Northwestern’s vulnerability to whatever conditions the administration might later impose. Litigation is therefore not only a strategic option but a protective one. By seeking judicial review, Northwestern would force the government to justify its actions, reinforce the limits of executive power under the APA and ICA, and prevent the normalization of politically conditioned federal funding.
Northwestern does not have an endowment on the scale of Harvard’s, and whether or not it could afford a suit is debatable.[17] For this reason, some believe the safer move is to wait for the political situation to change rather than risk losing everything in a legal fight. But it has now been months since the original orders, and the university has received no official updates. Meanwhile, Northwestern has been forced to implement drastic budget cuts simply to stay afloat. Continuing down this path will inevitably lead to more program cuts and the loss of much of what draws students here in the first place.
All in all, it may be time for Northwestern to follow in the footsteps of its peers and use every legal tool available to challenge the freeze. Given the lack of evidence supporting a Title VI violation, the absence of congressional authorization for the freeze, and the pattern of arbitrary agency behavior documented across institutions, Northwestern has substantial grounds to challenge the funding suspension under both the APA and the ICA. Continuing to negotiate indefinitely offers no guarantee of relief and has already resulted in severe operational damage. Litigation, by contrast, would compel judicial review, and prevent the Trump administration from imposing undisclosed or ideologically driven conditions. The university’s current desire to negotiate privately is understandable given the dire circumstances. However, it may be beneficial for the new leaders of our school to consider the bolder alternative.
Notes:
U.S. Department of Education, “U.S. Department of Education Probes Cases of Antisemitism at Five Universities” (Feb. 3, 2025).
“Federal Government Freezes $790 Million in Funding for Northwestern,” The Daily Northwestern (Apr. 8, 2025).
Northwestern University Office of the President, “Reduction in Northwestern’s Workforce.”
“Northwestern Sees Jump in Research Funding Proposals Over Past Decade,” The Daily Northwestern (Feb. 3, 2025).
Northwestern University Office of the President, “Update on Federal Funding” (Apr. 10, 2025).
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Part 1.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.242-15: Stop‑Work Order.
U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 2 C.F.R. § 200.340 (“Termination”) (Uniform Guidance).
U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Uniform Guidance, 2 C.F.R. Part 200.
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, “Trump Administration Freezes $2.2 Billion in Grants to Harvard.”
Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 (Pub. L. 79-404).
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Impoundment Control Act.
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Harvard University v. Trump Administration, Memorandum & Order (Sept. 3, 2025).
“Trump Administration’s UCLA Demands Target International Students, DEI Initiatives,” Daily Bruin (Oct. 25, 2025).
“NU AAUP Dispatches: It’s Time to Take the Trump Administration to Court,” The Daily Northwestern (Oct. 29, 2025).
“Universities with the Biggest Endowments,” U.S. News & World Report.
Bibliography:
“U.S. Department of Education Probes Cases of Antisemitism at Five Universities.” U.S. Department of Education, https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-probes-cases-of-antisemitism-five-universities.
“Federal Government Freezes $790 Million in Funding for Northwestern.” The Daily Northwestern, 8 Apr. 2025, https://dailynorthwestern.com/2025/04/08/campus/federal-government-freezes-790-million-in-funding-for-northwestern/.
“Reduction in Northwestern’s Workforce.” Northwestern University Office of the President, https://www.northwestern.edu/leadership-notes/2025/reduction-in-northwesterns-workforce.html.
“Northwestern Sees Jump in Research Funding Proposals Over Past Decade.” The Daily Northwestern, 3 Feb. 2025, https://dailynorthwestern.com/2025/02/03/campus/sciencetechnology/northwestern-sees-jump-in-research-funding-proposals-over-past-decade/.
“Update on Federal Funding.” Northwestern University Office of the President, https://www.northwestern.edu/leadership-notes/2025/update-on-federal-funding.html.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 1. Acquisition.gov, https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-1#FAR_1_000.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.242-15: Stop-Work Order. Acquisition.gov, https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.242-15.
“§200.340 Termination.” Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Government Publishing Office, https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/CFR-2017-title2-vol1/CFR-2017-title2-vol1-sec200-340.
Uniform Guidance, 2 C.F.R. Part 200. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200#subpart-B.
“Trump Administration Freezes $2.2 Billion in Grants to Harvard.” Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/trump-administration-freezes-2-2-billion-in-grants-to-harvard/.
Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 (Public Law 79-404). U.S. Department of Justice, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/05/01/act-pl79-404.pdf.
“Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI.
“Impoundment Control Act.” U.S. Government Accountability Office, https://www.gao.gov/legal/appropriations-law/impoundment-control-act.
Harvard University v. Trump Administration (Court Filing, D. Mass.). Harvard University, https://www.harvard.edu/federal-lawsuits/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2025/09/gov.uscourts.mad_.283718.238.0_1.pdf.
“Trump Administration’s UCLA Demands Target International Students, DEI Initiatives.” Daily Bruin, 25 Oct. 2025, https://dailybruin.com/2025/10/25/trump-administrations-ucla-demands-target-international-students-dei-initiatives.
“NU AAUP Dispatches: It’s Time to Take the Trump Administration to Court.” The Daily Northwestern, 29 Oct. 2025, https://dailynorthwestern.com/2025/10/29/opinion/nu-aaup-dispatches-its-time-to-take-the-trump-administration-to-court/.
“Universities with the Biggest Endowments.” U.S. News & World Report, https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-list-college/articles/universities-with-the-biggest-endowments.