WASHINGTON — The Trump administration announced Tuesday it was canceling another $450 million in grants to Harvard University after the Ivy League school “repeatedly failed” to quell race discrimination and antisemitism on campus.

“There is a dark problem on Harvard’s campus, and by prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support,” members of Trump’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism said in a statement.

“Harvard, and its leadership group who are tainted by the egregious infractions under its watch, faces a steep, uphill battle to reclaim its legacy as a lawful institution and center of academic excellence.”

The cuts are coming from at least eight different federal agencies, and are taking place after the task force — which comprises the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services as well as the General Services Administration — terminated $2.2 billion in grants last week.

Reps for Harvard University declined to comment but directed The Post to an amended complaint filed Tuesday in its lawsuit against the Trump administration’s funding freeze.

“The Government’s actions flout not just the First Amendment, but also federal laws and regulations,” reads the revised suit filed by attorney Steven Lehotsky of the law firm Lehotsky Keller Cohn.

“Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,” Harvard’s legal team acknowledged.

“But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of current and future funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism and Title VI compliance.”

The task force cited the Supreme Court’s 2023 rebuke of the university in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, internal university investigations and reports about discriminatory practices at the school’s law review journal as proof of the “pervasive” racial bias and anti-semitism.

“[T]he [Harvard Law Review] awarded a $65,000 fellowship — meant to “serve the public interest” — to a protester who faced criminal charges for assaulting a Jewish student on campus,” the task force noted.

“The decision was reviewed and approved by a faculty committee, demonstrating just how radical Harvard has become.”

The $2.2 billion in additional medical and other research grants were yanked by the National Institutes of Health, according to a May 6 letter from NIH director for extramural research Michelle Bulls.

“You may object and provide information and documentation challenging these terminations,” the NIH official added, asking for a response within 30 days.

But the letter also warned that “no corrective action is possible here.”

Other letters trickled in from the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, Education and the National Science Foundation “announcing the termination of awards,” according to Harvard’s new complaint filed in Massachusetts federal court.

“To date, the Government has — with little warning and even less explanation — slashed billions of dollars in federal funding to universities across America, including Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, and Northwestern,” the lawsuit states.

“This case involves the Government’s efforts to use the withholding of federal funding as leverage to gain control of academic decisionmaking at Harvard.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon had warned Harvard administrators in a separate letter last week not to apply for further federal grants, “since none will be provided.”

In her note to university president Alan Garber, McMahon charged that Harvard “has made a mockery of this country’s higher education system.”

“It has invited foreign students, who engage in violent behavior and show contempt for the United States of America, to its campus,” she added. “In every way, Harvard has failed to abide by its legal obligations, its ethical and fiduciary duties, its transparency responsibilities and any semblance of academic rigor.”