Your Cart is Empty
Trajan Hammonds
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: A couple of weeks ago, at 1 a.m., I found out the National Science Foundation (NSF) Postdoctoral Fellowship I applied for was being canceled because it did not comply with Trump’s new executive order on federal funding for DEI initiatives. I did what anyone from my generation would do in a moment like this: I took to X to share my experience. It’s clear that the Trump administration’s assault against academia has begun — and ultimately students, researchers, and our country are on the losing end.
Keith E. Whittington
The Volokh Conspiracy, Reason Magazine
Excerpt: Yesterday the Trump administration launched yet another massive financial blow at a university because it has done some things the administration does not like. This time the University of Pennsylvania's medical research is being decimated because the administration disagrees with the Penn athletic department's transgender policies.
Elisabeth Stewart and Luke Grippo
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Princeton will freeze most faculty and staff hiring, citing uncertainty around federal funding and a potential increased endowment tax, according to a memo sent to faculty and staff Wednesday morning. The letter, from Provost Jennifer Rexford and Executive Vice President Katie Callow-Wright, follows many other universities adopting hiring freezes in response to funding uncertainty. It represents the University’s most significant response to date to recent federal actions.
Daily Princetonian Editorial Board
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Some institutions have been cowed by threats from the federal government. This acquiescence is dangerous. Complying with constitutionally contested directives before judges rule on their legality normalizes them. As Columbia’s example has taught us, even repeated concessions to the Trump administration won’t protect you. As an institution relatively insulated from financial shocks from the federal government, we have a unique responsibility to speak out. Even among the Ivy League, Princeton’s wealth, prestige, and historical reputation as the most conservative Ivy give the University unique influence.
Ming Lovejoy,'82
February 28, 2025
This is a thoughtful and passionate piece, and I appreciate the frustration of losing a hard-earned opportunity due to sweeping policy changes. That said, the larger issue at hand isn’t an attack on academia itself but a long-overdue course correction in how federal funds are allocated. For years, DEI-infused programs—many prioritizing ideology over merit—have dominated higher education, often at the expense of open discourse and intellectual diversity. The Ascend fellowship, despite being open to all, explicitly tied funding to racial and identity-based criteria, making it a natural target for reforms aimed at restoring race-neutral policies in federal funding.
The concerns about endowment taxation and funding cuts are valid, but they also raise an important question: Why should taxpayers continue to subsidize institutions that increasingly seem insulated from the realities of the country they serve? If Princeton and other elite universities truly value intellectual excellence, they should prioritize funding research and postdocs based on merit, not just federal handouts.
Instead of blaming external policies, academia should take this moment to reflect on how it has alienated much of the public. The growing skepticism toward higher education isn’t just “anti-intellectualism”—it’s a reaction to an academic culture that too often dismisses dissenting viewpoints and operates in ideological silos. If scholars want broader public support, they need to reconnect with everyday Americans, engage in real debate, and make the case for their work based on its merits—not just moral appeals or accusations of political hostility. A return to true academic rigor and open inquiry will do far more to secure the future of higher education than any government program ever could.