Harvard University is standing up to the Trump administration, as the feds pressure the Cambridge school to end DEI programs and “audit” the viewpoints of its student body, faculty, and staff.

Harvard on Monday announced that it’s rejecting a list of demands from the Trump admin. This comes as the feds threaten to cut more $8.7 billion in multi-year grant commitments to Harvard and its affiliates amid an antisemitism investigation.

“The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Harvard’s lawyers wrote to the Trump admin in a letter. “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,” the attorneys added. “But Harvard is not prepared to agree to demands that go beyond the lawful authority of this or any administration.”

Amid the antisemitism investigation, the feds have been calling on Harvard to eliminate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs.

The feds have said Harvard must implement merit-based admissions policies, and end all preferences based on race, color, or national origin in admissions. Harvard must implement merit-based hiring policies, the feds added.

Then late Friday night, the Trump administration issued an updated and expanded list of demands.

“They include requirements to ‘audit’ the viewpoints of our student body, faculty, staff, and to ‘reduce the power’ of certain students, faculty, and administrators targeted because of their ideological views,” Harvard President Alan Garber wrote.

“It makes clear that the intention is not to work with us to address antisemitism in a cooperative and constructive manner,” the university president wrote about the feds’ letter. “Although some of the demands outlined by the government are aimed at combating antisemitism, the majority represent direct governmental regulation of the ‘intellectual conditions’ at Harvard.”

Related Articles

These abortion abolitionists want women who get abortion to face criminal charges

Fire set at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home is the latest in a string of political violence

Trump considers pausing his auto tariffs as the world economy endures whiplash

Majority Leader John Thune’s ‘old-fashioned’ approach to the Senate has kept Trump on board so far

Some top tech leaders have embraced Trump. That’s created a political divide in Silicon Valley

Garber claimed that the Trump administration’s demands violate Harvard’s First Amendment rights, and exceed the statutory limits of the government’s authority under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

“And it threatens our values as a private institution devoted to the pursuit, production, and dissemination of knowledge,” he wrote. “No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

When it comes to antisemitism, Garber said the campus over the past 15 months has taken many steps to address antisemitism.

The university has adopted new accountability procedures, imposed discipline for those who violate university policies, enhanced programs to address bias, dedicated resources to combat hate and bias, enhanced safety and security measures, and more.

“As a result, Harvard is in a very different place today from where it was a year ago,” its lawyers wrote. “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.”

The Trump administration in its demand letter argued that Harvard in recent years has failed to live up to “intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment.”

“We therefore present the below provisions as the basis for an agreement in principle that will maintain Harvard’s financial relationship with the federal government,” the feds wrote. “If acceptable to Harvard, this document will constitute an agreement in principle, which the parties will work in good faith to translate into a more thorough, binding settlement agreement… We expect your immediate cooperation in implementing these critical reforms that will enable Harvard to return to its original mission of innovative research and academic excellence.”

By TARA COPP and LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A long sliver of federal land along the U.S.-Mexico border that President Donald Trump is turning over to the Department of Defense would be controlled by the Army as part of a base, which could allow troops to detain any trespassers, including migrants, U.S. officials told The Associated Press.

Related Articles

A Venezuelan man was tackled in a New Hampshire courthouse and sent by ICE to Texas

A Chicago Bulls hat triggered a man’s deportation. Is profiling by apparel, tattoos on the rise?

El Salvador President Bukele says he won’t be releasing a Maryland man back to the US

U.S. Renews Opposition to Bringing Back Maryland Man Wrongly Deported to El Salvador

Scores of supporters attend court hearing for U student facing deportation

The transfer of that border zone to military control — and making it part of an Army installation — is an attempt by the Trump administration to get around a federal law that prohibits U.S. troops from being used in domestic law enforcement on American soil.

But if the troops are providing security for land that is part of an Army base, they can perform that function. However, at least one presidential powers expert said the move is likely to be challenged in the courts.

The officials said the issue is still under review in the Pentagon, but even as any legal review goes on, the administration’s intent is to have troops detain migrants at the border.

The corridor, known as the Roosevelt Reservation, is a 60-foot-wide federal buffer zone that ribbons along the border from New Mexico to California, except where it encounters tribal or privately owned land. It had been run by the Interior Department until Trump directed control be transferred to the Defense Department in a presidential memo released Friday night.

For the next 45 days, the Defense Department will test taking control of a section of the Roosevelt Reservation in New Mexico, east of Fort Huachuca, which is an Army installation in Arizona, one of the U.S. officials said. During that period, the Army will put up additional fencing and signs warning people not to trespass.

People not authorized to be in that area could be arrested by the Army’s security forces, the officials said, who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide details not yet made public.

Any migrants in the country illegally who are detained by military personnel on those lands would be turned over to local civilian law enforcement agencies, the officials said.

Troops are prohibited from conducting civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil under the Posse Comitatus Act. An exception known as the military purpose doctrine allows it in some cases — but would not apply here and would likely be challenged in the courts, said Elizabeth Gotein, an expert on presidential emergency powers at the Brennan Center for Justice.

That’s because even though troops would be on land designated as an Army installation, they would have to prove that their primary mission there was not to conduct border security and law enforcement — and the whole point of Trump’s order transferring the Roosevelt Reservation to the military’s control is to secure the border, she said.

The military purpose doctrine “only applies if the law enforcement aspect is incidental,” Gotein said. “Does this (area) have a military purpose that has nothing to do with enforcing customs and security at the border?”

Rebecca Santana contributed from Washington.

A volunteer at a Roseville church has been charged with sexually assaulting four young children at the church.

Joshua Alirio Seeman, 50, “is a cognitively delayed adult with a lengthy history of sexual assault accusations against him made by vulnerable adults, and now young children,” according to the criminal complaint filed Friday.

Joshua Alirio Seeman (Courtesy of the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office)

Roseville police were notified by a parent on April 6 that his 5-year-old son had been sexually assaulted by Seeman at King of Kings Lutheran Church on Dale Street near Minnesota 36. Police received reports the next day about three additional victims: a 4-year-old boy, a 5-year-old girl and a 6-year-old boy.

It wasn’t known as of Monday whether there were other possible victims. Roseville police are asking people who attend the church to talk to family members who interacted with Seeman, a volunteer at the church for about two years, and contact police if they believe he victimized them, said Deputy Chief Joe Adams.

‘Mr. Josh’ seen in bathrooms

The complaint against Seeman, of St. Paul, gives the following information from police and prosecutors:

On April 6, after a man picked up his son from Sunday school, the boy told his father that his “butt” was hurting.

The child confided in his mother at home that “Josh” told him “that his parents were okay with them going into the bathroom together.” His mother asked if it happened before and he said it had three or four times. About two weeks earlier, the child’s teacher said the boy had been in the bathroom for about 30 minutes, which was unusual.

The child’s parents told another person about the incidents. He informed his family, who are active members of the church, and learned a relative saw “Mr. Josh” walk girls to the bathroom and saw him enter the boy’s bathroom on April 6.

The man also asked his relatives to speak with their children, which led to a woman discussing with her 6-year-old son about “‘right’ and ‘wrong’ behavior from people in his life, like family and church members.” The child told his mother, “Mr. Josh asked me to pull my pants down. Is that wrong?”

Both of the children underwent medical exams at Midwest Children’s Resource Center. The 6-year-old’s mother asked him to use his toy elephant to show what happened in the bathroom stall with Seeman. He pointed to the front and bottom of the elephant’s lower area, “then became distraught and said he forgot.”

The 5-year-old also “did not make any disclosures about inappropriate touches during the exam and said he didn’t remember telling his parents what Seeman had done to him,” the complaint said. “Per medical professionals, ‘It is not uncommon for children who disclose sexual abuse to be uncomfortable discussing it in an interview setting. His spontaneous disclosure to his father raises significant concern for sexual abuse.’”

Parents say he also contacted them about babysitting

The mother of another child, a 5-year-old girl, said her daughter hadn’t been allowing her to wipe her “private area” during baths on Sundays over the past month or two, saying they hurt. She asked her daughter about “Mr. Josh” and the girl told her he brought her and another 5-year-old girl to the bathroom. She said he wouldn’t let either of them shut the door when they used the toilet and he looked at them.

During the girl’s exam, she reported that Seeman took her to the bathroom and used his hand to touch the outside and inside of her vagina.

The mother of the girl also spoke to her 4-year-old son and he told her “Mr. Josh” touched his penis and buttocks, “then got very emotional and broke down saying he forgot what happened,” the complaint said.

The parents of two of the children said Seeman had contacted them previously about babysitting for them. He also asked about taking some of the children bowling.

The Ramsey County Attorney’s Office charged Seeman with two counts of first-degree and two counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct.

No one could be reached at King of Kings Lutheran Church in Roseville for comment as of Monday afternoon.

Prosecution declined in past cases

Seeman was arrested on Thursday. His brother is his legal guardian and told police they weren’t allowed to interview him, and he would seek an attorney’s advice on his brother’s behalf.

Related Articles

Months after CEO’s killing, a reported intruder is arrested at UnitedHealthcare headquarters

Fire set at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home is the latest in a string of political violence

Former Colorado deputy sentenced to 3 years in prison for killing man who called for help

El Salvador President Bukele says he won’t be releasing a Maryland man back to the US

South St. Paul murder charge: Man called 911 to say he shot roommate, 72

Seeman remained jailed as of Monday. His attorney couldn’t immediately be reached.

Police received sexual assault reports about Seeman in 2001, 2006, 2014, 2015 and 2022.

“Prosecution on all but one prior case has been declined due to Seeman’s cognitive disability,” the complaint said, adding that there were “multiple attempts” to get help for Seeman.

He was charged with fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct in 2022 involving a woman who was previously a friend of Seeman’s and who has the “cognitive functioning level of a child,” the criminal complaint in that case said. She reported it happened in the bathroom of a White Bear Lake park.

After evaluation by a psychologist, a judge ruled he was incompetent to proceed with the legal matter “due to mental illness or cognitive impairment,” according to a court document. A “forensic navigator” was appointed to provide services for Seeman with “the goal of attaining his competence” for the court case to continue, the document said.

Last week, before learning of the current case, the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office filed a notice of intent to prosecute in the 2022 case.

By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS, AP Business Writer

Confusion over President Donald Trump’s tariffs remains following a weekend of questions around trade in consumer electronics.

On Friday the Trump administration paused its new taxes on electronics imported into the U.S. — signaling some relief from trade wars that have particularly escalated with China, a major exporter of technology from smartphones to laptops. But these goods remain subject to other levies.

And officials have also indicated that additional, sector-specific tariffs targeting electronics are on the way — all of which economists warn will raise costs and lead to higher prices for consumers.

Here’s what we know.

Are electronics exempt from Trump’s newest tariffs?

Late Friday, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection said that electronics, including smartphones and laptops, would be excluded from broader, so-called “reciprocal” tariffs — meaning these goods wouldn’t be subject to most tariffs levied on China to date or the 10% baseline levies imposed on other countries.

But U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick later said that this was only a temporary reprieve — telling ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that electronics will be included under future sector-specific tariffs on semiconductor products, set to arrive in “probably a month or two.”

And not all of the levies that the U.S. has imposed on countries like China fall under the White House’s “reciprocal” categorization. Hours after Lutnick’s comments, Trump declared on social media that there was no “exception” at all, adding to confusion. Trump instead argued that these goods are “just moving to a different” bucket. He also said that China will still face a 20% levy on electronics imports as part of his administration’s prior move related to fentanyl trafficking.

How has China responded?

On Sunday, China’s commerce ministry welcomed a partial reprieve on consumer electronics — but continued to call for the U.S. to completely cancel the rest of its tariffs.

Chinese President Xi Jinping reiterated that on Monday, writing in an editorial jointly published in Vietnamese and Chinese official media that “there are no winners in a trade war.” He added that both China and the U.S. “should resolutely safeguard the multilateral trading system, stable global industrial and supply chains, and open and cooperative international environment.”

Tit-for-tat tariffs between the U.S. and China have escalated to new heights over recent months. Since taking office in January, Trump has imposed a series of levies that now amount to 145% taxes on a range of imports from the country.

In response, China has hit back with its own measures, including tariffs on U.S. goods that currently total 125%. Its Commerce Ministry has also said it will impose more export controls on rare earths, used in high-tech products such as computer chips and electric vehicle batteries.

What could reducing tariffs on electronics mean for consumers?

Tariffs are taxes on goods imported from other countries. And because so many of the electronics we buy rely on a global supply chain, economists have warned that tariffs impacting consumer technology could mean higher prices for your next smartphone, computer or other gadgets.

Reducing the size of those tariffs, even temporarily, could delay or lessen that impact. But it’s unlikely that price hikes will be totally avoided. Electronics will still be taxed by previous (non-“reciprocal”) tariffs — and potentially under additional, sector-specific levies down the road.

Related Articles

Months after CEO’s killing, a reported intruder is arrested at UnitedHealthcare headquarters

Trump considers pausing his auto tariffs as the world economy endures whiplash

Have you experienced a disaster? You have more time to file your taxes

Tax Day is Tuesday. Are you ready? Tips for late filers

Nvidia plans to manufacture AI chips in the US for the first time

It would also be incredibly difficult for companies to change their supply chains. The Trump administration argues that tariffs will entice big names like Apple, for example, to make iPhones in the U.S. for the first time. But Apple has spent decades building up a finely calibrated supply chain in China — and it would take years and cost billions of dollars to build new plants in the U.S.

Dipanjan Chatterjee, vice president and principal analyst at Forrester, said in a note Monday that Apple should continue “business-as-usual” supply chain diversification and have “Plan B” pricing for different product lines — while pausing before taking action to reduce risk and working on the company’s relationship with both U.S. and Chinese governments to avoid blowback.

Trump signaled on Monday that he had spoken to Apple CEO Tim Cook before exempting electronics from some of his China tariffs — telling reporters that he had “helped” Cook with the partial reprieve, while separately saying he plans to provide temporary exemptions for auto makers that may also need “a little bit of time.” The Associated Press reached out to Apple for statement.

How is Wall Street reacting?

Tariffs have plunged financial markets worldwide into turmoil — particularly battering stocks following of Trump’s sweeping announcement on April 2. That cooled after news of this partial electronics exemption, as well as last week’s pause of steeper tariffs outside of China.

As of Monday afternoon, the S&P 500 was 0.2% higher, though trading was still shaky after it gave back most of its early gain of 1.8%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 57 points, or 0.1%, and the Nasdaq composite fell 0.1%

Still, the relief could be fleeting. Uncertainty remains high for many companies trying to make long-term plans when conditions seem to change daily.

“Businesses thrive on stability because they plan around rules of engagement … Ergo, markets perform better when businesses are confident that the rules are really the rules,” Chatterjee wrote Monday. Still, he added, businesses will need to avoid knee-jerk reactions while evaluating risk. “When Friday’s policies are thrown out with Sunday’s brunch leftovers, companies will resort to one primary strategy: do as little as possible and thereby do no harm.”

AP Writers Josh Boak in Washington, Mae Anderson in Nashville and Matt O’Brien in Providence, Rhode Island, contributed to this report.