/May 30, 2025/4:28 p.m. ETTrump Attacks Harvard With Social Media Screening for All VisasThis pilot program will soon be expanded across the country.Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesThe Trump administration has begun carrying out its expanded vetting for student visa applicants, surveilling their social media accounts to make sure they aren’t posting anything in support of Palestine, which the administration considers antisemitic. This vetting will start with Harvard visa applicants but is expected to be adopted nationwide.Secretary of Stato Marco Rubio sent a cable to all U.S. embassies and consulates on Thursday ordering them to “conduct a complete screening of the online presence of any nonimmigrant visa applicant seeking to travel to Harvard University for any purpose.” That would apply not just to students but also to faculty, staff, and researchers visiting the university.The Trump administration is taking particular interest in people who have their social media accounts on “private,” an obvious, ominous crossing of boundaries.The State Department has ordered officers to examine “whether the lack of any online presence, or having social media accounts restricted to ‘private’ or with limited visibility, may be reflective of evasiveness and call into question the applicant’s credibility.”This is yet another instance of Harvard serving as a test subject for the administration’s larger crackdown on free speech and international students at American universities. Trump has already revoked billions of dollars in research funding from the Massachusetts school, and even banned it from admitting any international students at all, although the latter policy was temporarily revoked by a judge. Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:53 p.m. ETStephen Miller Grilled on Musk’s Drug Use as Wife Lands New GigTrump’s chief adviser seems desperate to avoid questions on Elon Musk. Does that have anything to do with his wife’s new job? Francis Chung/Politico/Bloomberg/Getty ImagesStephen Miller had a dismissive response Friday to new reports of Elon Musk’s drug use during Trump’s campaign last year. CNN’s Pamela Brown asked the far-right Trump adviser if there was “any drug testing or requests for him to drug test when he was in the White House given the fact that he was also a contractor with the government.”  A chuckling Miller ignored the question and said, “Fortunately for you and all of the friends at CNN, you’ll have the opportunity to ask Elon all the questions you want today yourself,” before he then segued into the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant agenda. “The drugs I’m concerned about are the drugs that are coming across the border from the criminal cartels that are killing hundreds of thousands of Americans,” Miller said. Perhaps Miller laughed instead of answering because his wife, Katie Miller, has left her job as adviser and spokesperson for the Department of Government Efficiency to work full-time for Musk and his companies. Miller has probably had enough of Musk, as he has also been subtweeting the tech oligarch, trying to refute Musk’s criticisms that the Republican budget bill would raise the deficit. “The Big Beautiful Bill is NOT an annual budget bill and does not fund the departments of government. It does not finance our agencies or federal programs,” Miller said, in a long X post earlier this week. Is there bad blood between Miller and Musk that has now spiraled because Miller’s wife is working for the tech oligarch and fellow fascism enthusiast? Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:19 p.m. ETOld Man Trump Repeatedly Fumbles in Weird Speech Praising Elon MuskDonald Trump couldn’t keep some of his words straight as he marked the supposed end of Elon Musk’s tenure at the White House.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesHours after reports emerged Friday that Elon Musk had been under the influence of heavy drugs during his time advising the president, Musk and Donald Trump stumbled and fumbled their way through a White House press conference recognizing the end of the tech billionaire’s special government employee status.The wildly unusual joint conference featured Musk’s black eye, a giant gold key that Trump said he only gives to “very special people,” cringe-worthy regurgitations by Musk of Trump’s take on his Pulitzer Board defamation suit, and claims that Musk’s unpopular and controversial time in the White House was not quite over.But as Trump continued to praise Musk and his time atop the Department of Government Efficiency, the president’s verbal gaffes became more apparent. He claimed that DOGE had uncovered $42 million in wasteful spending, referring to expenditures related to Uganda, which Trump pronounced as “oo-ganda.” The 78-year-old also mentioned he would have Musk’s DOGE cuts “cauterized by Congress,” though he quickly corrected himself by saying they would be “affirmed by Congress,” instead. Trump’s on-camera slippage has gotten worse in recent weeks: Earlier this month, Trump dozed off while in a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. That is despite the fact that the president received a clean bill of health in a medical report released in April that described Trump as being in “excellent health,” including neurological functioning.Musk, meanwhile, refused to acknowledge emerging reports of his alleged drug use. But the news of White House drug use under Trump’s helm is nothing new: In fact, if the reports prove true, it would be little more than a return to form. Last year, a report by the Department of Defense inspector general indicated that the West Wing operated more like a pill mill than the nation’s highest office. Common pills included modafinil, Adderall, fentanyl, morphine, and ketamine, according to the Pentagon report. But other, unlisted drugs—like Xanax—were equally easy to come by from the White House Medical Unit, according to anonymous sources that spoke to Rolling Stone.While other presidents were known to take a mix of drug cocktails to fight off back pain (like JFK) or bad moods (like Nixon), no previous administrations matched the level of debauchery of Trump’s, whose in-office pharmacists unquestioningly handed out highly addictive substances to staffers who needed pick-me-ups or energy boosts—no doctor’s exam, referral, or prescription required.“It was kind of like the Wild West. Things were pretty loose. Whatever someone needs, we were going to fill this,” another source told Rolling Stone in March 2024.Meanwhile, pharmacists described an atmosphere of fear within the West Wing, claiming they would be “fired” if they spoke out or would receive negative work assignments if they didn’t hand pills over to staffers.Read more about the press conference:Trump and Elon Musk Have Ominous Warning About Future of DOGEMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:00 p.m. ETElon Musk Gives Strange Excuse for Massive Black EyeMusk showed up a press conference with Donald Trump sporting a noticeable shiner.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesElon Musk sported what looked like a black eye during his DOGE goodbye press conference with President Trump on Friday. When asked about it, he blamed the bruise on his 5-year-old son punching him in the face. “Mr. Musk … is your eye OK? What happened to your eye; I noticed there’s a bruise there?” one reporter finally asked near the end of the press conference.“Well, I wasn’t anywhere near France,” Musk said, in a weak attempt at a joke regarding footage of French President Emmanuel Macron’s wife slapping him in the face.“I was just horsing around with [my son] little X and said, ‘Go ’head and punch me in the face,’ and he did. Turns out even a 5-year-old punching you in the face actually does—”“That was X that did it? X could do it!” Trump chimed in. “If you knew X …”“I didn’t really feel much at the time; I guess it bruises up. But I was just messing around with the kids.”Musk chose an impeccable time to show up to a press conference with a black eye. Earlier in the day, The New York Times reported on Musk’s rampant drug use on and off the campaign trail, as the world’s richest man frequently mixed ketamine and psychedelics and kept a small box of pills, mostly containing Adderall. The shiner only adds to speculation around his personal habits.More on that Times report:Elon Musk Was on Crazy Combo of Drugs During Trump CampaignMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/2:51 p.m. ETTrump and Elon Musk Have Ominous Warning About Future of DOGEElon Musk’s time as a government employee has come to an end, but his time with Donald Trump has not.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesDespite the fanfare over Elon Musk’s supposed departure from the Department of Government Efficiency, Donald Trump says that the billionaire bureaucrat isn’t really going anywhere.“Many of the DOGE people are staying behind, so they’re not leaving. And Elon’s not really leaving. He’s gonna be back and forth, I think. I have a feeling. It’s his baby, and he’s gonna be doing a lot of things,” Trump said during a press conference in the Oval Office Friday.The press conference was held to mark the end of Musk’s time as a so-called “special government employee,” a title that allowed him to bypass certain ethics requirements during his 134-day stint in Trump’s administration. The president made sure to give Musk a gaudy golden key—what it actually unlocks went totally unaddressed—to make sure he could get back into the White House. “This is not the end of DOGE, but really the beginning,” Musk said, promising that DOGE’s “influence” would “only grow stronger” over time.Earlier Friday, the billionaire bureaucrat shared a post on X asserting that the legacy of DOGE was more psychological than anything else. Surely, it will take longer than four months to forget the image of Musk running around with a chainsaw. Read more about Musk:Elon Musk Was on Crazy Combo of Drugs During Trump CampaignMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/1:21 p.m. ETDem Governor Vetoes Ban on Surprise Ambulance Bills in Shocking MoveThe bill had unanimous support in both chambers of the state legislature.Michael Ciaglo/Getty ImagesColorado’s Democratic Governor Jared Polis has vetoed a bill that would ban surprise billing by ambulance companies, over the unanimous objections of both chambers of the state legislature. Why would Polis veto a bill that’s popular with everyone, even Colorado Republicans? The governor wrote in his veto statement that drafting errors in the bill made it “unimplementable” and estimated that it would make insurance premiums go up by as much as $0.73 to $2.15 per person. “I am committed to working with proponents and sponsors to protect Coloradans from surprise bills, but I encourage all parties to work towards a more reasonable reimbursement rate that mitigates premium impacts and nets a better deal for Colorado families,” Polis wrote. In Colorado, if legislators in both chambers repass the bill with a two-thirds majority, they can override the governor’s veto, especially considering that the bill passed with the support of every single legislator. But the legislature adjourned on May 7, meaning that the bill has to be passed again when the legislature reconvenes in January.  For some reason, ending surprise ambulance billing nationally is not the slam-dunk issue it should be. Congress ended most surprise medical bills in 2020 but exempted ground ambulances from the bill. Was Polis’s veto due to badly drafted language and a (seemingly modest) price hike in insurance premiums, as he said, or was it for a different, more nefarious reason? We might not know unless and until the bill is reintroduced next year. More on surprise ambulance bills:Congress Doesn’t Care About Your Surprise Ambulance Bill Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/12:21 p.m. ETTrump’s Pardons Since Jan 6 Spree Show an Infuriatingly Corrupt TrendSince his January 6 pardon spree, Donald Trump has tended to grant clemency a little closer to home.Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty ImagesA good chunk of the white-collar criminals pardoned by Donald Trump after his massive “Day One” pardoning spree either have a political or financial tie to him.The president has issued 60 pardons since he offered political forgiveness to some 1,600 individuals charged in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. But out of those subsequent 60 unrelated to the attack, 12 people—or roughly one in five—were already in Trump’s orbit, according to ABC News.They included several politicos, including former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted on several counts of corruption, including for an attempt to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat after he left the position for the White House; former Republican Representative Michael Grimm, who pleaded guilty to tax fraud; former Nevada gubernatorial candidate Michele Fiore, who allegedly stole public funds intended to commemorate a slain police officer; and former Tennessee state Senator Brian Kelsey, who pleaded guilty to campaign finance fraud in 2022.Trump also pardoned major financiers of his presidential campaigns. Trevor Milton, the founder of the Nikola electric vehicle company, donated nearly $2 million toward Trump’s 2024 campaign. Imaad Zuberi, who has donated to both parties, issued “at least $800,000 to committees associated with Trump and the Republican Party,” ABC reported.Others helped Trump advance his retribution campaign against his political enemies, or helped advance his own image in the broader Republican Party. Devon Archer and Jason Galanis, both former business partners of Hunter Biden, accused the younger Biden of leveraging his father’s name and influence in order to conduct business overseas. Archer had defrauded a Native American tribal entity, while Galanis was serving time for multiple offenses. Trump also forgave Todd and Julie Chrisley—reality TV stars known for their show Chrisley Knows Best who were sentenced to a combined 19 years on fraud and tax evasion charges—after their daughter Savannah Chrisley spoke at the 2024 Republican National Convention.Speaking to press Friday after her parents’ release, Savannah Chrisley said that the “biggest misconception right now is I either paid for a pardon or slept for a pardon—,” but she couldn’t finish her sentence before Todd interjected: “That’s something I would have done,” he said.Read who else Trump is thinking of pardoning:Trump Considering Pardons for Men Who Tried to Kill Gretchen WhitmerMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/12:04 p.m. ETTrump Knew He Was Deporting Innocent People to El Salvador All AlongMany of the people deported to El Salvador have no criminal record, and Donald Trump knew it.Michael M. Santiago/Getty ImagesDonald Trump’s administration was well aware that many of the 238 Venezuelan immigrants it shipped off to a notorious megaprison in El Salvador had no criminal records at all, according to a Friday report from ProPublica.  While Trump officials claimed that the deportees were brutal gang members and “the worst of the worst,” only 32 of the deportees had actually been convicted of crimes, and most of them were minor offenses such as traffic violations, according to data from the Department of Homeland Security reviewed by ProPublica, The Texas Tribune, and a team of journalists from Venezuelan media outlets. One of the men, 23-year-old Maikol Gabriel López Lizano, faced a misdemeanor charge after he was arrested in 2023 for riding his bike and drinking a can of beer.Little more than half of the deportees, 130 of the 238, were charged only with violating U.S. immigration laws. Twenty of them had criminal records from other countries. The U.S. government data showed that 67 individuals had pending charges, with only six being for violent crimes. In several cases, the government data about the pending charges differed from what ProPublica was able to find. In some cases, the men had actually been convicted, and in one, the charges had been dropped. But in many cases, these individuals were remanded to a foreign prison before their criminal cases were ever resolved. The Trump administration has touted allegations of gang affiliation as a justification for denying the deportees their due process rights. But none of the men’s names appeared on a list of roughly 1,400 alleged Tren de Aragua members kept by the Venezuelan government, ProPublica reported. Trump’s border czar Tom Homan tried desperately in March to downplay reporting that many of these individuals did not have criminal records. “A lot of gang members don’t have criminal histories, just like a lot of terrorists in this world, they’re not in any terrorist databases, right?” Homan said on ABC News. But the methods the government relies on to classify individuals as gang members—such as identification of gang-affiliated tattoos—have been disproven by experts. Not only were many of the men who were deported not proven gang members, they weren’t even criminals, and by denying them the right to due process, they were remanded to a foreign prison notorious for human rights abuses without ever getting to prove it. Trump has continued to pressure the Supreme Court to allow him to sidestep due process as part of his massive deportation campaign, claiming that the judiciary has no right to intrude on matters of “foreign policy.” But immigrants residing on U.S. soil—who are clearly not the bloodthirsty criminals the administration insists they are—are still subject to protections under U.S. law. Read more about the deportations:Trump Asks Supreme Court to Help Him Deport People Wherever He WantsMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/11:41 a.m. ETJoni Ernst Stoops to Shocking Low When Told Medicaid Cuts Will KillSenator Joni Ernst had a disgusting answer when confronted by a constituent at her town hall about Trump’s budget bill.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesRepublican Senator Joni Ernst had a particularly unhinged response to questions from her constituents at a town hall in Parkersburg, Iowa, on Friday.Ernst was asked about the GOP’s budget bill kicking people off of Medicaid, and her condescending answer quickly became callous and flippant as the Iowa politician smirked at the audience.“When you are arguing about illegals that are receiving Medicaid, 1.4 million, they’re not eligible, so they will be coming off, so—” Ernst began, before an audience member shouted, “People are going to die!”“People are not—well, we all are going to die,” Ernst responded, as the audience drowned her in loud protests.What was Ernst thinking with that answer? Almost every Republican town hall this year has gone badly for the politician holding it, thanks to President Trump upending the federal government, and Ernst surely knew that choosing death over Medicaid wouldn’t go over well with the crowd. Earlier this week in Nebraska, Representative Mike Flood was heckled after he admitted that he didn’t read the budget bill.Ersnt’s town hall wasn’t even the first one in Iowa to go badly for a Republican. On Wednesday, Representative Ashley Hinson was met with jeers and boos, with audience members in Decorah, Iowa calling her a fraud and a liar. But at least Hinson had the good sense not to seemingly embrace death over a vital, lifesaving government program. More on Trump’s bill:Here Are the Worst Things in Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/11:35 a.m. ETKetanji Brown Jackson Blasts “Botched” Supreme Court Ruling on TPSSupreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a scathing disssent, called out the rest of the court for allowing Trump’s harmful executive order to stand.Anna Moneymaker/Getty ImagesSupreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson thinks the Supreme Court “botched” a decision to allow the Trump administration to revoke the Temporary Protected Status protections of about 500,000 Haitian, Cuban, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan immigrants.Jackson and fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor were the only two dissenters.“The Court has plainly botched this assessment today. It requires next to nothing from the Government with respect to irreparable harm,” Jackson wrote in the dissent. “And it undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives of and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending.”TPS is a long-standing program that allowed those 500,000 immigrants to stay in the U.S. after they fled violence and risk in their home countries. After the Supreme Court’s ruling, all of them are at high risk of sudden deportation. “It is apparent that the government seeks a stay to enable it to inflict maximum predecision damage,” Jackson wrote.Read the full dissent here.View More Posts

The shoehorning of AI into everything has programmers at Amazon feeling less like the tedious parts of their jobs are being smoothly automated, and more like their work is beginning to resemble the drudgery of toiling away in one of the e-commerce giant's vast warehouses.That's the bleak picture painted in new reporting from the New York Times, in which Amazon leadership — as is the case at so many other companies — is convinced that AI will marvelously jack up productivity. Tasked with conjuring the tech's mystic properties, of course, are our beleaguered keyboard-clackers.Today, there's no shortage of coding AI assistants to choose from. Google and Meta are making heavy use of them, as is Microsoft. Satya Nadella, CEO of the Redmond giant, estimates that as much as 30 percent of the company's code is now written with AI. If Amazon's to keep up with the competition, it needs to follow suit. CEO Andy Jassy echoed this in a recent letter to shareholders, cited by the NYT, emphasizing the need to give customers what they want as "quickly as possible," before upholding programming as a field in which AI would "change the norms."And that it has — though this is less due to the merits of AI and more the result of the over-eager opportunism of the company's management. Three Amazon engineers told the NYT that their bosses have increasingly pushed them to use AI in their work over the past year. And with that came increased output goals and even tighter deadlines. One engineer said that his team was reduced to roughly half the size it was last year — but it was still expected to produce the same amount of code by using AI.In short, new automating technology is being used to justify placing increased demands at their jobs."Things look like a speed-up for knowledge workers," Lawrence Katz, a labor economist at Harvard University, told the NYT, citing ongoing research. "There is a sense that the employer can pile on more stuff."Adopting AI was ostensibly optional for the Amazon programmers, but the choice was all but made for them. One engineer told the newspaper that they're now expected to finish building new website features in just a few days, whereas before they had several weeks. This ludicrous ramp up is only made possible by using AI to automate some of the coding, and comes at the expense of quality: there's less time for consulting with colleagues to get feedback and bounce ideas around.Above all, AI is sapping all the joy out of their profession. AI-amalgamated code requires extensive double checking — a prominent critique that can't be ignored here and is one of the main reasons skeptics question whether these programming assistants actually produce gains in efficiency. And when you're reduced to proofreading a machine, there's little room for creativity, and an even more diminished sense of control."It's more fun to write code than to read code," Simon Willison, a programmer and blogger who's both an enthusiast of AI and a frequent critic of the tech, told the NYT, playing devil's advocate. "If you're told you have to do a code review, it's never a fun part of the job. When you're working with these tools, it's most of the job."Amazon, for its part, maintains that it conducts regular reviews to ensure that its teams are adequately staffed. "We'll continue to adapt how we incorporate Gen AI into our processes," an Amazon spokesman told the NYT.More on AI: AI Is Replacing Women's Jobs SpecificallyShare This Article

Harvard Graduate School of Design Dean Sarah Whiting has condemned the Trump Administration’s effort to bar international students from attending Harvard University. The move, which has been temporarily halted by a federal judge, sought to prevent Harvard from enrolling students on F- or J-visas, which would effectively force international students to switch to another institution, leave the United States, or face deportation. Approximately 25% of students at Harvard University are international. According to previous reporting by college database Peterson’s, 31% of students at the Harvard GSD are international. Harvard President Alan Garber called the Trump Administration’s move “unlawful and unwarranted,” warning that it "imperils the futures of thousands of students and scholars across Harvard and serves as a warning to countless others at colleges and universities throughout the country who have come to America to pursue their education and fulfill their dreams.” https://...

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. OpenAI: The power and the pride OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT 3.5 set in motion an AI arms race that has changed the world. How that turns out for humanity is something we are still reckoning with and may be for quite some time. But a pair of recent books both attempt to get their arms around it.In Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman’s OpenAI, Karen Hao tells the story of the company’s rise to power and its far-reaching impact all over the world. Meanwhile, The Optimist: Sam Altman, OpenAI, and the Race to Invent the Future, by the Wall Street Journal’s Keach Hagey, homes in more on Altman’s personal life, from his childhood through the present day, in order to tell the story of OpenAI.  Both paint complex pictures and show Altman in particular as a brilliantly effective yet deeply flawed creature of Silicon Valley—someone capable of always getting what he wants, but often by manipulating others. Read the full review.—Mat Honan This startup wants to make more climate-friendly metal in the US The news: A California-based company called Magrathea just turned on a new electrolyzer that can make magnesium metal from seawater. The technology has the potential to produce the material, which is used in vehicles and defense applications, with net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions. Why it matters: Today, China dominates production of magnesium, and the most common method generates a lot of the emissions that cause climate change. If Magrathea can scale up its process, it could help provide an alternative source of the metal and clean up industries that rely on it, including automotive manufacturing. Read the full story. —Casey Crownhart A new sodium metal fuel cell could help clean up transportation A new type of fuel cell that runs on sodium metal could one day help clean up sectors where it’s difficult to replace fossil fuels, like rail, regional aviation, and short-distance shipping. The device represents a departure from technologies like lithium-based batteries and is more similar conceptually to hydrogen fuel cell systems. The sodium-air fuel cell has a higher energy density than lithium-ion batteries and doesn’t require the super-cold temperatures or high pressures that hydrogen does, making it potentially more practical for transport. Read the full story. —Casey Crownhart The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 The US state department is considering vetting foreign students’ social mediaAfter ordering US embassies to suspend international students’ visa appointments. (Politico)+ Applicants’ posts, shares and comments could be assessed. (The Guardian)+ The Trump administration also wants to cut off Harvard’s funding. (NYT $) 2 SpaceX’s rocket exploded during its test flight It’s the third consecutive explosion the company has suffered this year. (CNBC)+ It was the first significant attempt to reuse Starship hardware. (Space)+ Elon Musk is fairly confident the problem with the engine bay has been resolved. (Ars Technica)3 The age of AI layoffs is hereAnd it’s taking place in conference rooms, not on factory floors. (Quartz)+ People are worried that AI will take everyone’s jobs. We’ve been here before. (MIT Technology Review)4 Thousands of IVF embryos in Gaza were destroyed by Israeli strikesAn attack destroyed the fertility clinic where they were housed. (BBC)+ Inside the strange limbo facing millions of IVF embryos. (MIT Technology Review) 5 China’s overall greenhouse gas emissions have fallen for the first timeEven as energy demand has risen. (Vox)+ China’s complicated role in climate change. (MIT Technology Review) 6 The sun is damaging Starlink’s satellitesIts eruptions are reducing the satellite’s lifespans. (New Scientist $)+ Apple’s satellite connectivity dreams are being thwarted by Musk. (The Information $) 7 European companies are struggling to do business in ChinaEven the ones that have operated there for decades. (NYT $)+ The country’s economic slowdown is making things tough. (Bloomberg $) 8 US hospitals are embracing helpful robotsThey’re delivering medications and supplies so nurses don’t have to. (FT $)+ Will we ever trust robots? (MIT Technology Review) 9 Meet the people who write the text messages on your favorite show They try to make messages as realistic, and intriguing, as possible. (The Guardian) 10 Robot dogs are delivering parcels in AustinWell, over 100 yard distances at least. (TechCrunch) Quote of the day “I wouldn’t say there’s hope. I wouldn’t bet on that.” —Michael Roll, a partner at law firm Roll & Harris, explains to Wired why businesses shouldn’t get their hopes up over obtaining refunds for Donald Trump’s tariff price hikes. One more thing Is the digital dollar dead?In 2020, digital currencies were one of the hottest topics in town. China was well on its way to launching its own central bank digital currency, or CBDC, and many other countries launched CBDC research projects, including the US.How things change. The digital dollar—even though it doesn’t exist—has now become political red meat, as some politicians label it a dystopian tool for surveillance. So is the dream of the digital dollar dead? Read the full story. —Mike Orcutt We can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.) + Recently returned from vacation? Here’s how to cope with coming back to reality.+ Reconnecting with friends is one of life’s great joys.+ A new Parisian cocktail bar has done away with ice entirely in a bid to be more sustainable.+ Why being bored is good for you—no, really.

A small home in Wayne County, Missouri was torn apart by a tornado. An aerial image by Jeff Roberson taken on March 15 depicts chunks of stick-framed walls and half-recognizable debris strewn across a patchy lawn in an eviscerated orthography of middle-American life. Elisa Iturbe, assistant professor of Architecture at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design, describes this scene as “an image of climate impact, climate victimhood…these walls are doing the hard work of containment, of containing the rituals of human lifestyle.” Roberson’s image embodied the themes that emerged from the Projective Territories Symposium: The atomized fragility of contemporary American domesticity, the fundamental link between ways of living and modes of land tenure, and the necessary primacy of form in architecture’s response to the incoming upheaval of climate change. Lydia Kallipoliti talked about her 2024 book Histories of Ecological Design; An Unfinished Cyclopedia. (Andy Eichler) Projective Territories was hosted at Kent State University’s College of Architecture and Environmental Design on April 3 and 4. Organized and led by the CAED’s assistant professor Paul Mosley, the symposium brought Iturbe, Columbia University’s associate professor Lydia Kallipoliti, California College of the Arts’ associate professor Neeraj Bhatia, and professor Albert Pope of Rice University to Kent, Ohio, to discuss the relationship between territory and architecture in the face of climate change. “At its core, territory is land altered by human inhabitation,” read Mosley’s synopsis. “If ensuring a survivable future means rethinking realities of social organization, economy, and subsistence, then how might architecture—as a way of thinking and rethinking the world—contribute to these new realities?” Projective Territories kicked off on the afternoon of April 3 with a discussion of Bhatia’s Life After Property exhibition hosted at the CAED’s Armstrong Gallery. The exhibition collected drawings, renderings, and models by Bhatia’s practice The Open Workshop on a puzzle-piece shaped table constructed from plywood and painted blue. Nestled into the table’s geometric subtractions, Bhatia, Pope, Mosley, and CAED associate professor Taraneh Meshkani discussed Bhatia’s research into the commons: A system of land tenure by which communities manage and share resources with minimal reliance on the state through an ethic of solidarity, mutualism, and reciprocity. Neeraj Bhatia presented new typologies for collective living. (Andy Eichler) The symposium’s second day was organized into a morning session, “The Erosion of Territory,” with lectures by Kallipoliti and Iturbe, and an afternoon session, “The Architecture of Expanding Ecologies,” with lectures by Bhatia and Pope. Mosley’s introduction to “The Erosion of Territory” situated Kallipoliti and Iturbe’s work in a discussion about “how territories have been historically shaped by extraction and control and are unraveling under strain.” Lydia Kallipoliti’s lecture “Ecological Design; Cohabiting the World” presented questions raised by her 2024 book Histories of Ecological Design; An Unfinished Cyclopedia, which she described as “an attempt to clarify how nature as a concept was used in history.” Kallipoliti proposed an ecological model that projects outward from domestic interiors to the world to generate a “universe of fragmented worldviews and a cloud of stories.” Iturbe’s “Transgressing Immutable Lines” centered on her research into the formal potentials for Community Land Trusts—nonprofits that own buildings in trust on existing real estate. Iturbe described these trusts as “Not just a juridical mechanism, but a proposal for rewriting the relationship between land and people.” “Ecology is the basis for a more pleasurable alternative,” said Mosley in his introduction to the day’s second session. “Cooperation and care aren’t the goals, but the means of happiness.” An exhibition complementing the symposium shared drawings, renderings, and models. (Andy Eichler) Neeraj Bhatia’s lecture “Life After Property” complemented the previous days’ exhibition, problematizing the housing crisis as an ideological commitment to housing rooted in market speculation. Bhatia presented new typologies for collective living with the flexibility to formally stabilize the interpersonal relationships that define life in the commons. Albert Pope finished the day’s lectures with “Inverse Utopia,” presenting work from his 2024 book of the same name, which problematizes postwar American urban sprawl as an incapability to visualize the vast horizontal expansion of low-density development. Collectively, the day’s speakers outlined a model that situated the American domestic form at the center of the global climate crisis. Demanding complete separation from productive territories, this formal ideology of the isolated object is in a process of active dismemberment under climate change. The speakers’ proposed solutions were unified under fresh considerations of established ideas of typology and form, directly engaging politics of the collective as an input for shaping existing space. As Friday’s session drew to a close, the single-family home appeared as a primitive relic which architecture must overcome. Albert Pope’s images of tower complexes in Hong Kong and council estates in London that house thousands appeared as visions of the future. “The only way we can begin to address this dilemma is to begin to understand who we are in order to enlist the kinds of collective responses to this problem,” said Pope. Walker MacMurdo is an architectural designer, critic, and adjunct professor who studies the relationship between architecture and the ground at Kent State University’s College of Architecture and Environmental Design.

In the summer of 2023, I wrote about a shocking scandal at Harvard Business School: Star professor Francesca Gino had been accused of falsifying data in four of her published papers, with whispers there was falsification in others, too. A series of posts on Data Colada, a blog that focuses on research integrity, documented Gino’s apparent brazen data manipulation, which involved clearly changing study data to better support her hypotheses. This was a major accusation against a researcher at the top of her field, but Gino’s denials were unconvincing. She didn’t have a good explanation for what had gone wrong, asserting that maybe a research assistant had done it, even though she was the only author listed across all four of the falsified studies. Harvard put her on unpaid administrative leave and barred her from campus.The cherry on top? Gino’s main academic area of study was honesty in business.As I wrote at the time, my read of the evidence was that Gino had most likely committed fraud. That impression was only reinforced by her subsequent lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada authors. Gino complained that she’d been defamed and that Harvard hadn’t followed the right investigation process, but she didn’t offer any convincing explanation of how she’d ended up putting her name to paper after paper with fake data.This week, almost two years after the news first broke, the process has reached its resolution: Gino was stripped of tenure, the first time Harvard has essentially fired a tenured professor in at least 80 years. (Her defamation lawsuit against the bloggers who found the data manipulation was dismissed last year.)What we do right and wrong when it comes to scientific fraudHarvard is in the news right now for its war with the Trump administration, which has sent a series of escalating demands to the university, canceled billions of dollars in federal grants and contracts, and is now blocking the university from enrolling international students, all in an apparent attempt to force the university to conform to MAGA’s ideological demands. Stripping a celebrity professor of tenure might not seem like the best look at a moment when Harvard is in an existential struggle for its right to exist as an independent academic institution. But the Gino situation, which long predates the conflict with Trump, shouldn’t be interpreted solely through the lens of that fight. Scientific fraud is a real problem, one that is chillingly common across academia. But far from putting the university in a bad light, Harvard’s handling of the Gino case has actually been unusually good, even though it still underscores just how much further academia has to go to ensure scientific fraud becomes rare and is reliably caught and punished.There are two parts to fraud response: catching it and punishing it. Academia clearly isn’t very good at the first part. The peer-review process that all meaningful research undergoes tends to start from the default assumption that data in a reviewed paper is real, and instead focuses on whether the paper represents a meaningful advance and is correctly positioned with respect to other research. Almost no reviewer is going back to check to see if what is described in a paper actually happened.Fraud, therefore, is often caught only when other researchers actively try to replicate a result or take a close look at the data. Science watchdogs who find these fraud cases tell me that we need a strong expectation that data be made public — which makes it much harder to fake — as well as a scientific culture that embraces replications. (Given the premiums journals put on novelty in research and the supreme importance of publishing for academic careers, there’s been little motivation for scientists to pursue replication.). It is these watchdogs, not anyone at Harvard or in the peer-review process, who caught the discrepancies that ultimately sunk Gino.Crime and no punishmentEven when fraud is caught, academia too often fails to properly punish it. When third-party investigators bring a concern to the attention of a university, it’s been unusual for the responsible party to actually face consequences. One of Gino’s co-authors on one of the retracted papers was Dan Ariely, a star professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. He, too, has been credibly accused of falsifying data: For example, he published one study that he claimed took place at UCLA with the assistance of researcher Aimee Drolet Rossi. But UCLA says the study didn’t happen there, and Rossi says she did not participate in it. In a past case, he claimed on a podcast to have gotten data from the insurance company Delta Dental, which the company says it did not collect. In another case, an investigation by Duke reportedly found that data from a paper he co-authored with Gino had been falsified, but that there was no evidence Ariely had used fake data knowingly.Frankly, I don’t buy this. Maybe an unlucky professor might once end up using data that was faked without their knowledge. But if it happens again, I’m not willing to credit bad luck, and at some point, a professor who keeps “accidentally” using falsified or nonexistent data should be out of a job even if we can’t prove it was no accident. But Ariely, who has maintained his innocence, is still at Duke. Or take Olivier Voinnet, a plant biologist who had multiple papers conclusively demonstrated to contain image manipulation. He was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for two years. It’s hard to imagine a higher scientific sin than faking and manipulating data. If you can’t lose your job for that, the message to young scientists is inevitably that fraud isn’t really that serious. What it means to take fraud seriouslyGino’s loss of tenure, which is one of a few recent cases where misconduct has had major career consequences, might be a sign that the tides are changing. In 2023, around when the Gino scandal broke, Stanford’s then-president Marc Tessier-Lavigne stepped down after 12 papers he authored were found to contain manipulated data. A few weeks ago, MIT announced a data falsification scandal with a terse announcement that the university no longer had confidence in a widely distributed paper “by a former second-year PhD student.” It’s reasonable to assume the student was expelled from the program.I hope that these high-profile cases are a sign we are moving in the right direction on scientific fraud because its persistence is enormously damaging to science. Other researchers waste time and energy following false lines of research substantiated by fake data; in medicine, falsification can outright kill people. But even more than that, research fraud damages the reputation of science at exactly the moment when it is most under attack.We should tighten standards to make fraud much harder to commit in the first place, and when it is identified, the consequences should be immediate and serious. Let’s hope Harvard sets a trend.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!See More:

html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd" Together with Italy's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Italy's Ministry of Environment and Energy Security, CIHEAM Bari, the World Bank Group's Connect4Climate program, Brazil's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Bloomberg Philanthropies, CRA-Carlo Ratti Associati and Höweler + Yoon have unveiled AquaPraça, a floating cultural plaza that will serve as the focal point of COP30 in Belém, Brazil. AquaPraça serves as a forum for international climate discussion by utilizing sensing technologies and Archimedes' principle to adjust to shifting sea levels and occupancy demands. It will make its transatlantic journey to the Amazonian city, where it will become a permanent cultural landmark, after making its premiere at the 19th International Architecture Exhibition of the 2025 Venice Architecture Biennale. The architecture of AquaPraça, which spans more than 400 square meters (4,000 square feet), physically carves out public space from the sea, establishing a tangible conversation between natural forces and the constructed environment. Using the concepts of buoyancy, displacement, and equilibrium, the submersible structure floats. AquaPraça continuously adjusts its holding and releasing capacity to keep a low freeboard with the surrounding water level. At eye level, the audience witnesses the dynamic variations of sea level rise, resulting in fresh insights into urban and ecological systems. AquaPraça's aim is to act as a civic catalyst. It can accommodate more than 150 people for cultural events, workshops, symposia, and exhibitions. It will make its sustainable journey to Belém after making its debut at the Biennale Architettura in September 2025. There, it will be a crucial component of the Italian Pavilion at COP 30, showcasing Italy's architectural and climate action thoughts to a worldwide audience. As a permanent legacy of the summit in the Amazon, the platform will continue to be a component of Belém's cultural infrastructure after the summit. A special international alliance makes AquaPraça possible. It was started in collaboration with the Ministry of Environment and Energy Security and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation in Italy. It is also supported by Bloomberg Philanthropies, the World Bank's Connect4Climate program, CIHEAM Bari, Brazil's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and others. The establishment emphasizes the goal of bringing disparate communities together and promoting ecological thought globally. There is a formal procedure in place for expressing interest."In 1979, Aldo Rossi launched the Teatro del Mondo at the first Biennale Architettura, positing that architecture could engage with the past," said Carlo Ratti, professor at MIT and the Politecnico di Milano, co-founder of CRA, and curator of the Biennale Architettura 2025.""Today, AquaPraça shows how architecture can engage with the future—by responding to climate and engaging with nature rather than resisting it,” Ratti added."AquaPraça lets visitors meet the sea at eye level," said Eric Höweler, co-founder of Höweler + Yoon and a Professor at Harvard University. "Its sloping surfaces and shifting levels embody a delicate equilibrium." "It’s a platform, both literal and figurative, for deepening our collective understanding and experience of sea level rise and the impacts of climate change on global cities and communities," added J. Meejin Yoon, co-founder of Höweler + Yoon and the Gale and Ira Drukier Dean at Cornell University College of Architecture, Art, and Planning, “and seeking collective solutions."Image © Agnese BediniImage © Agnese BediniImage © Agnese BediniImage © Agnese BediniImage © Agnese BediniImage © Agnese BediniLeading cutting-edge steel construction firm Cimolai is now building AquaPraça in northeastern Italy. It will be exhibited on September 4, 2025, at the 19th International Architecture Exhibition of the 2025 Venice Architecture Biennale, before traveling to Brazil. A permanent floating monument in the Amazon, it will be anchored in Belém from November 10–21, 2025, as part of the Italy Pavilion at COP30. It is an architectural example of flexibility and communication in the face of climate change.Project factsProject name: AquaPraçaArchitects: CRA-Carlo Ratti Associati (Coordinator) and Höweler + Yoon ArchitectureTeam MembersCRA-Carlo Ratti Associati: Carlo Ratti (Principal), Andrea Cassi (Principal), Luca Bussolino (Strategy), Gizem Veral (Architect), Sonia Simone (Architect), Rodolfo Siccardi (Senior Architect), Gary di Silvio (Architect/3D Artist), Pasquale Milieri (Architect/3D Artist), Gianluca Zimbardi (Architect/3D Artist); Höweler + Yoon Architecture: J Meejin Yoon (Principal), Eric Höweler (Principal), Asli Baran Grace (Project manager), Shuang Chen (Designer), Selin Sahin (researcher), David Hamm (Technical Advisor) Supporters: Ministero degli Affari Esteri e della Cooperazione Internazionale; Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Sicurezza Energetica; Bloomberg Philanthropies; Cornell University College of Architecture, Art, and PlanningIn collaboration with: Ciheam Bari, the World Bank Group’s Connect4Climate Program Technical Collaborators: Elettra Bordonaro, Argun Paragamyan, and Luciana Martinez, Light Follows Behaviour; Cristiano Bottino, Studio FM; Mykola Murashko, Davide Spina, Julio Ramirez, and Eren Sezer, Maestro Technologies; Corrado Curti, IngeMBP; Luca Infanti, Luca Vian, Simone Andreatta, Filippo Bellomo, and Mario Nattero, CIMOLAI; Roberto Prever and Antonio Vatta, NAOS; Ruben Pescara and Lodovica Bontempelli, NMLex; Domenico Perrotta, DP38.All images courtesy of CRA and Höweler + Yoon Architecture.All exhibition images © Agnese Bedini.> via Carlo Ratti Associati

In 1965, then-French finance minister Valéry Giscard d’Estaing came up with the “mot juste” for describing the way that the supremacy of the dollar provided the foundation for the financial supremacy of the US. The fact the dollar was so dominant in international transactions gave the US, d’Estaing said, an “exorbitant privilege.” Because every country needed dollars to settle trade and backstop their own currencies, foreign countries had to buy up US debt, which in turn meant that the US paid less to borrow money and was able to run up trade and budget deficits without suffering the usual pain. The exorbitant privilege of the dollar was that the US would be able to live beyond its means. It’s always been an open question as to how long that privilege would last, but President Donald Trump’s harsh tariff policies, paired with a budget bill that right now would add trillions to the budget deficit, might just be enough to finally dislodge the dollar. Annual federal deficits are already running at 6 percent of GDP, while interest rates on 10-year US Treasuries have more than doubled to around 4.5 percent over the past few years, increasing the cost of interest payments on the debt. As of the last quarter of 2024, 58 percent of global reserves were in dollars, down from 71 percent in the first quarter of 1999. The dollar may remain king, if only because there seems to be no real alternative, but thanks to the US’ own actions, the exorbitance of its privilege is already eroding — and with it, America’s ability to compensate for its fiscal fecklessness.But the dollar isn’t the only privilege the US enjoys. Since the postwar era, America’s best universities have led the world. Harvard, Princeton, MIT, CalTech — these elite universities are the foundation of the American scientific supremacy that has in turn fueled decades of economic growth. But also, by virtue of their unparalleled ability to attract the best minds from around the world, these schools have given the US the educational privilege of being the magnet of global academic excellence. In the same way that the dollar’s dominance has allowed the US to live beyond its means, the dominance of elite universities has compensated for the fact that the US has, at best, a mediocre K-12 educational system. And now that privilege is under attack by the Trump administration. Cutting off federal funding for universities like Columbia and Princeton and eviscerating agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation were bad enough, but the administration’s recent move to bar international students from Harvard would be a death blow, especially if it spread to other top schools. And it seems entirely possible that it might. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US would “aggressively revoke” visas for Chinese students and enhance future scrutiny on all applicants from China. (That includes applicants from Hong Kong — a once-free city that has come firmly under the boot of the Chinese government — who are precisely the kind of students a past America would have sought to defend.)The ability to attract the best of the best, especially in the sciences, is what makes Harvard Harvard, which in turn has helped make the United States the United States. Just as losing the privilege of the dollar would force the US to finally pay for years of fiscal mismanagement, losing the privilege of these top universities would force the country to pay for decades of educational failure. American science runs on foreign talentAs Vox contributor Kevin Carey wrote this week, foreign students are a major source of financial support for US colleges and universities, many of which would struggle to survive should those students disappear. But the financial picture actually understates just how much US science depends on foreign talent and, in turn, depends on top universities like Harvard to bring in top students and professors.An astounding 70 percent of grad students in the US in electrical engineering and 63 percent in computer science — probably the two disciplines most important to winning the future — are foreign-born. Nineteen percent of the overall STEM workforce in the US is foreign-born; focus just on the PhD-level workforce, and that number rises to 43 percent. Since 1901, just about half of all physics, chemistry, and medicine Nobel Prizes have gone to Americans, and about a third of those winners were foreign-born, a figure that has risen in recent decades. It’s really not too much to suggest that if all foreign scientists and science students were deported tomorrow, US science would grind to a halt.Could American-born students step into that gap? Absolutely not. That’s because as elite as America’s top universities are, the country’s K-12 education system has been anything but. Every three years, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is given to a representative sample of 15-year-old students in over 80 countries. It’s the best existing test for determining how a country’s students compare in mathematics, reading, and science to their international peers. In the most recent PISA tests, taken in 2022, US students scored below the average for OECD or developed countries in math; on reading and science, they were just slightly above average. And while a lot of attention has been rightly paid to learning loss since the pandemic — one report from fall 2024 estimated that the average US student is less than halfway to a full academic recovery — American students have lagged behind their international peers since long before then. Other wealthy nations, from East Asian countries to some small European ones, regularly outpace American peers in math by the equivalent of one full academic year.To be clear, this picture isn’t totally catastrophic. It’s fine — American students perform around the middle compared to their international peers. But just fine won’t make you the world’s undisputed scientific leader. And fine is a long way from what the US once was. America was a pioneer in universal education, and it did the same in college education through the postwar GI Bill, which opened up college education to the masses. By 1950, 34 percent of US adults aged 25 or older had completed high school or more, compared to 14 percent in the UK and 11 percent in France. When NASA engineers were putting people on the moon in the 1960s, the US had perhaps the world’s most educated workforce to draw from.Since then, much of the rest of the world has long since caught up with the US on educational attainment, and a number of countries have surpassed it. But thanks in large part to the privilege that is elite universities like Harvard or the University of California, and their ability to recruit the best, no country has caught up to the US in sheer scientific brainpower. Take away our foreign talent, however, and US science would look more like its K-12 performance — merely fine.Life after HarvardIt seems increasingly apparent that the Trump administration wants to make an example of Harvard, proving its own dominance by breaking a 388-year-old institution with strong ties to American power and influence. On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that the administration planned to cancel all remaining federal contracts with Harvard, while Trump himself mused on redirecting Harvard’s $3 billion in grants to trade schools. Grants and contracts are vital, but they can be restored, just as faith in the US dollar might be restored by a saner trade policy and a tighter budget. But if the Trump administration chooses to make the US fundamentally hostile to foreign students and scientific talent, there may be no coming back. Politico reported this week that the administration is weighing requiring all foreign students applying to study in the US to undergo social media vetting. With universities around the world now competing to make themselves alternatives to the US, what star student from Japan or South Korea or Finland would choose to put their future in the hands of the Trump administration, when they could go anywhere else they wanted?The US once achieved scientific leadership because it educated its own citizens better and longer than any other country. Those days are long past, but the US managed to keep its pole position, and all that came with it, because it supported and funded what were far and away the best universities in the world. That was our privilege, as much as the dollar was. And now we seem prepared to destroy both.Should that come to pass, we’ll see just how little is left.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!Update, May 29, 9:50 AM ET: This story was originally published on May 28 and has been updated to include news of the Trump administration’s move to look to revoke visas of many students from China.You’ve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you — threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you — join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

Fifteen Iranian students and researchers sued the Trump administration for completely halting student visa interviews while it determines whether to vet all visa applicants’ social media accounts.The suit, filed against Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a Virginia federal court, claims that the pause on student visa interviews violates the Administrative Procedures Act, a law prohibiting capricious rule-making. The complaint is currently sealed. In an email, Curtis Morrison and Hamdi Masri, lawyers for the students, noted that the State Department has required visa applicants to disclose their social media handles since May 2019. Visa applicants from certain Muslim-majority countries, including Iran, are already subject to “extensive social media vetting,” Masri said, adding that Trump seemed to want to “ensure students entering align with his political values.”The students and researchers who brought the suit against Rubio were admitted to universities across the country — including Yale, Ohio State, and the University of South Florida — for graduate programs in computer science, engineering, finance, and other disciplines. Per their attorneys, each of the students had already attended visa interviews, but all of their applications are currently “awaiting national security vetting.” Some of the students were interviewed over a year ago.The pause on student visa interviews is part of the Trump administration’s multi-pronged attack on universities and international students. On Wednesday, Rubio said the State Department would start working with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to “aggressively revoke visas for Chinese Students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.” On May 22nd, DHS rescinded Harvard’s access to a federal database used to track foreign students’ enrollment, putting nearly 6,800 people enrolled at Harvard at risk of immediate deportation until a federal judge intervened.Rubio has also suspended the visas of international students involved in pro-Palestine protests on campus. More recently, the State Department restricted visas of “foreign nationals who are responsible for censorship of protected speech in the United States,” i.e., regulators who enforce the European Union’s Digital Services Act.See More:

Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design (GSD) dean joined Alan Garber, the university’s president, in condemning the federal government earlier this week after it moved to block the university from being able to admit international students. GSD has a higher proportion of international students compared to the rest of the University’s student body, and Dean Sarah M. Whiting said international students are an integral part of the school. “I join President Garber in condemning the government’s illegal action against our school, and in affirming the immense value our international students bring to the GSD community,” Dean Sarah M. Whiting said in a note shared online Saturday. Whiting, who’s also a Josep Lluis Sert professor of architecture, said GSD is “one of the most international schools at Harvard” and that the school’s international makeup “goes back to the founding of the GSD.” Nearly a third of Harvard GSD students are international, which is higher than the 14% of international students who make up of the general student body at large, according to Peterson’s, an educational services company. Six of the school’s eight class of 2025 commencement marshals who represent their disciples at graduation are from outside the U.S. Whiting added that its international student body “is part of our DNA—our student body, our faculty, our staff, and the discipline and practice of design all thrive on this internationalism. The extraordinary breadth of experience and perspectives that the international members of our community provide is essential to who we are.” The school offers programs through its departments of architecture, landscape architecture, urban planning and design, design studies, and design engineering. A spokesperson from the school declined to comment for this piece. A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from rescinding Harvard’s ability to admit international students on Friday after the Department of Homeland Security revoked its Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification for admitting foreign students. Now, Trump is attempting to go after the university in other ways, including calls to redirect grants from the university to trade schools and no longer scheduling student visa appointments. Trump said Wednesday Harvard should have a cap of about 15% on international students and accused the university of being antisemitic and a “disaster.” Garber, the university president, told NPR Wednesday that Harvard should “stand firm” to its “commitment to the good of the nation” in the face of Trump’s retaliation over the private university’s policies around admissions, DEI programs, hiring, and international students.