A federal judge ruled the Trump administration’s cuts to Harvard funding unconstitutional, a Harvard researcher told 60 Minutes the cuts stalled her breast cancer project, and critics say the TV segment overplayed the science to raise money while the political fight over campus antisemitism carries on.
On September 4, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled the Trump administration’s funding cuts to Harvard unconstitutional and laid out a sharp critique in her opinion. She wrote in her decision that “Harvard was wrong to tolerate hateful behavior for as long as it did,” yet found that the federal government had “used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities.” She held that the government’s conduct violated the First Amendment, the Civil Rights Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act, and “jeopardized decades of research.”
Harvard officials have been cautious about the political fallout, and President Alan Garber insisted “Our principles will guide us on the path forward.” The original White House response argued the university had “failed to protect their students from harassment and allowed discrimination to plague their campus for years. We are confident we will ultimately prevail in our efforts to hold Harvard accountable.” That appeal threat stood even as funding was later restored and settlement talks continued.
The restored funding did not stop 60 Minutes from airing a human-focused segment that framed the cuts as an immediate threat to breast cancer work. Reporters featured a Harvard researcher who said her lab’s project had been interrupted and used that interruption to make a broader emotional argument about life-saving science. That timing and framing turned a legal dispute over campus policy into a narrative about stalled cures.
“My research has the potential to prevent their daughters, and their wives, and their cousins from developing breast cancer. And I don’t think any taxpayer would want to interfere with progress on a project like that,” Brugge said. She added, “The ultimate goal is to find the treatment that will eliminate those cells that carry the mutations,” Brugge told 60 Minutes. Brugge went on: “I just never imagined that research focused on a disease like cancer would be cancelled for a reason that was unrelated to the quality of the research or the progress of the research,” she continued. “But this was across the board for issues relating to diversity and antisemitism at Harvard.”
The emotional pitch is obvious and built to land. This is, of course, emotional manipulation. She even says, and emphasizes, that her work has the potential to prevent cancer. That kind of hope is common among scientists and doesn’t translate into an immediate promise of a cure, nor does it alone prove that a short funding pause devastated a unique, irreplaceable program.
Not everyone bought the narrative. One scientist, Jason Locasale, pushed back publically and questioned the messaging around the segment. And critics on social media, including a breast cancer survivor, reacted angrily to the fundraising undertone and timing of the story as the political battle played out.
“Like much of what’s being presented in this 60 Minutes segment,” Locasale wrote, “it’s a PR narrative designed to grab money. It’s dishonesty from these institutions about what technology from the life sciences can actually do—and it says more about the way universities grift the public for sympathy and funding than anything about science itself.” That is a harsh read, but it sums up why many taxpayers were skeptical about the mix of advocacy and reporting.
Voices on X amplified the backlash. “As a breast cancer survivor, I find her claims disgusting and exploitive,” one user wrote, reflecting how quickly the story turned into a partisan flashpoint. The combination of courtroom drama, restored grants, and a primetime feature made for a narrative that was equal parts sympathy and spectacle.
What incredible timing.
Editor’s Note: After more than 40 days of screwing Americans, a few Dems have finally caved. The Schumer Shutdown was never about principle—just inflicting pain for political points. Help us report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
