Instead of refuting President Trump’s claims or adhering to his requests, Harvard University chooses a third path: denouncing the administration’s actions as unconstitutional — while ignoring its own institutional flaws.

After a multi-billion-dollar funding freeze following Harvard’s noncompliance with the government, Alan M. Garber, Harvard’s President, feverishly sought legal action. He also seeks taxpayer pity for halted research programs, revocation of tax-exempt status and the impact it has on “American higher education in the world.”

University-wide antisemitism has been stirring for years and is what led to the onslaught of public and political backlash. The most notorious instance came when more that 30 Harvard student groups signed a letter blaming Israel for the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023.

It took 472 painstaking days for Harvard to adopt a formal definition of antisemitism after the letter. But once federal funding was at stake, it took them just seven days to launch a lawsuit against the U.S. Government. Coincidence? I think not.

Garber warned that the funding freeze would “undermine America’s ability to save lives.” It’s almost amusing to see him accidentally take accountability for his disobedience. However, I have a sneering suspicion that this isn’t the interpretation he was looking for. It’s obvious he is a desperate fearmonger, making a last-ditch effort to rally public opinion against the funding freeze.

Garber’s full response underscores Harvard’s cowardice. If their DEI programs, admissions practices and anti-hate efforts are up to par — the administration’s main concerns, and rightfully so — why doesn’t he say so? For a university with such high standards and rich history, sidestepping confrontation and blaming the authoritarian is quite alarming.

If Harvard continues to inadequately defend their actions, their motto, “Veritas” — Latin for “truth” — should be exchanged for “Victima,” a word that needs no translation.