Since Harvard University stands out as the country's premier institution of higher education, the Trump administration has targeted the university in its assault on collegiate infrastructure. But the school has positioned itself to fight back, both in the courts, where it's suing the administration over frozen federal funds, and in the court of public opinion. President Donald Trump's effort to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status has "no legal basis" and could have "grave consequences for the future of higher education," a university spokesperson said.

Loss of 'excellence and access'
It is "not immediately clear" whether the IRS is moving forward with revoking the school's tax-exempt status, said The New York Times. Such revocations "typically occur only after a lengthy process," and presidents are legally barred from "directing the IRS to conduct tax investigations" to begin with. The IRS "does not and should not conduct a 'fishing expedition' designed to hopefully uncover a relevant issue," said former IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig to Bloomberg.

Should Trump succeed, the trickle-down effect could be significant. Harvard would "lose excellence and access," said Wellesley College economist Phillip Levine to CBS News. It would no longer have the "ability to enroll the very brightest lower- and middle-income students," since the school's ability to offer financial aid would be affected. And Harvard's $50 billion endowment affords the school "less protection" than "such a stacked bank account might suggest," thanks to "legal restrictions, donor intent and other red tape," said Axios. 

'NATO for higher education'
By resisting the White House's "authoritarian overreach," the university "bolsters the entire system of U.S. higher education," said historian Bruce Kimball at Inside Higher Ed. If Harvard "caves, then no university will dare to defy governmental overreach." But if Harvard "resists, then others will be inspired to do so and shamed if they do not." 

Given that Trump is targeting huge swaths of academia at large, the "only strategy with a prayer of succeeding" is for schools of all stripes to "come together," said University of California, Berkeley, Professor David Kirp at The Guardian. That some 200 schools signed a statement decrying the White House's actions is a "great start," but a "NATO for higher education" — one in which schools share financial, legal and professional resources — "might just convince the bully in the White House to back off."

Two of the largest players in gasoline distribution are looking to form a marriage, and it could create a ripple effect when consumers head to the pump. Based in the U.S., Sunoco has announced its intentions to purchase the Canadian company Parkland in a deal that would create a dominating force in the North American petroleum industry. 

Why is this deal being made?
The $9.1 billion deal represents a "definitive agreement whereby Sunoco will acquire all outstanding shares of Parkland," Sunoco said in a press release. It will "position the combined company as the largest independent fuel distributor in the Americas," Michael Jennings, the executive chairman of Parkland, said in a statement.

The deal was largely made as a lifeline for Parkland, a company in the "midst of a leadership upheaval and a fight with its largest shareholder [Simpson]," said Bloomberg. Simpson has accused the company of "repeatedly missing financial guidance, pursuing flawed acquisitions and overseeing rising costs."

What does this mean for consumers?
Together, the combined companies appear poised to dominate the gas station market. Sunoco has 7,400 U.S. gas stations, including partner brands like ExxonMobil and Shell. Parkland has 4,000 gas stations in Canada, the U.S. and the Caribbean, using partner brands like Chevron. 

The deal "creates a network of more than 11,000 fueling stations," said Fortune. The combined company will make it difficult to fill up at a pump that isn't owned by them. 

If it closes, the deal will "deliver over $250 million in annual cost savings by the third year," which could affect prices inside the convenience stores of gas stations, said Reuters. It's unclear whether gas prices would be affected, as Canada is the "biggest foreign supplier to the U.S., accounting for about 60% of its oil imports," said the Financial Times. While the transaction is expected to be finalized, said The Globe and Mail, it will "require approval from the federal government at a time when relations between the U.S. and Canada are in a deep freeze due to President Donald Trump's imposition of tariffs."