Sarah McLaughlin
FIRE
Excerpt: American universities have long feared that the Chinese government will restrict its country’s students from attending institutions that cross Beijing’s sensitive political lines.
Universities still fear that consequence today, but the most immediate threat is no longer posed by the Chinese government. Now, as the latest punishment meted out to the Trump administration’s preeminent academic scapegoat shows, it’s our own government posing the threat.
Erin Shaw
Heterodox Academy
Excerpt: A win for open inquiry has appeared amidst relentless uncertainty in higher education. The Western Association of Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC), the accreditor of most universities in California and Hawaii, is reconsidering the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements for accreditation in light of the Trump Administration’s executive order on accreditation.
Though the total banning of all things “DEI” represents another political intrusion on academic freedom, dropping DEI as an accreditation requirement allows more space for freedom of thought in higher education as institutions are no longer bound to a particular partisan orthodoxy.
Johanna Alonso
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: The Trump administration is planning to implement a policy that would require all student visa applicants to undergo social media vetting, according to a cable sent by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Politico reported Tuesday. All new student visa interviews have been paused in preparation for the new policy.
“The Department is conducting a review of existing operations and process for screening and vetting of student and exchange visitor (F, M, J) visa applicants, and based on that review, plans to issue guidance on expanded social media vetting for all such applicants,” the memo reads, according to a copy published in full on social media by independent journalist Marisa Kabas.
Keith Whittington, Cass Sunstein
Academic Freedom Podcast, Academic Freedom Alliance
Excerpt: Keith Whittington interviews Cass Sunstein, the Robert Walmsley University Professor at Harvard Law School, whose scholarly interests include free speech, constitutional law, and administrative law. He recently authored a paper, “Our Money or Your Life!’ Higher Education and the First Amendment,” available here, which explores the First Amendment constraints of federal funding to American universities. Sunstein helps unpack the legal and constitutional questions raised by the Trump administration's strategy of withholding federal grants from schools like Columbia and Harvard to force internal policy reforms.
Why is 27 percent of Harvard’s total student body foreign when there are hundreds of thousands of bright young Americans who could fill those spots instead?
Of all the questions raised by the Department of Homeland Security’s announcement on Thursday that it would no longer issue visas to foreign students at Harvard (a move that has now been temporarily blocked by a judge), that’s the one that is the most existential. It forces us to ask: What—and who—are American universities actually for?
Eboo Patel
Persuasion
Excerpt: In 2020, Steven Wilson, former education adviser to the governor of Massachusetts, was condemned as racist and fired from his job for writing an essay on the educational philosophy underlying the network of charter schools he founded.
What exactly did Wilson do wrong? According to The New York Times, some younger staff at the Ascend schools considered his essay “racially traumatizing,” likely because it directly criticized the progressive educator Tema Okun’s profoundly destructive idea—as expressed in her popular 1999 workbook on “Dismantling racism”—that linear thinking, objectivity and respect for good writing are features of “white supremacy culture.”