by Johanna Alonso, Inside Higher Ed
Students at the State University of New York at Albany don’t view their recent protest of Ian Haworth, a conservative writer and podcaster who has made provocative statements about transgender people, as a disruption of his speaking engagement on campus.
The rapid expansion of funding for “civics institutes,” along with the spreading of state mandates that civics be taught as a core subject in colleges, has ignited much controversy. Debates focus on whether civics should be prioritized above other vital subjects, whether civics education should be concentrated in autonomous centers on campus, and whether states should dictate how it should be taught.
Ironically, the impetus to make civics a discipline came from progressive scholars nearly 20 years ago, not the conservatives now founding civics institutes across the country.
Jan-Werner Müller, renowned scholar of democratic theory and the history of political thought, was named Class of 1943 University Professor of Politics. Professor Müller is the founding director for the Academic Freedom Initiative and Forum for the History of Political Thought, which bring scholars together to examine academic freedom and the development of political ideas, respectively. Princeton endows 25 University professorships, which are the highest honor for faculty at the University.
Princeton faces many domestic threats. In 2024, a Forbes College dryer burst into flames, setting off fire alarms and forcing students to evacuate the residential college. Last year, residents of Yeh College and New College West were plagued by droves of mice in dorm rooms when they returned from winter break. Still, despite the formidable challenges these campus snafus represent, the threat these mishaps pose to the University pales in comparison to recent polemics against Princeton’s humanities education.
In an October podcast episode with The Free Press, Shilo Brooks, a former Princeton lecturer and executive director of the James Madison Program, painted a grim picture of the state of humanities education at Princeton. But Brooks’ issues with the humanities at Princeton are completely unfounded — a simple rebuttal lies in students’ level of passionate and sincere engagement with the humanities.
The grief Emily Taylor had been holding at bay finally washed over her in January. It had been four months since a lone gunman shot Charlie Kirk in the throat at Utah Valley University, killing the conservative commentator in minutes. That winter “was the first time in my entire life that I didn’t go back to school,” said the former English professor, holding back tears.
Taylor had resigned from her tenured position in December to save her tiny college in South Carolina from a political witch hunt in which lawmakers threatened to pull her school’s funding because she’d written a brief essay acknowledging that before his violent death, Kirk had employed violent rhetoric.
In the battle between Harvard and the federal government, Princeton is siding with Harvard.
On July 22, the University signed an amicus curiae brief supporting Harvard’s suit against multiple executive branch agencies over research funding cuts in a federal appeals court. The brief was joined by 35 other research universities and colleges, including the rest of the Ivy League.
Douglas Schleicher
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: In thinking about the complex problem of academic freedom, the Princeton community must take care to avoid false dichotomies that could be harmful and restrict free speech. One such dichotomy is the idea that we can have either controversial academic inquiry or allow those impacted by that inquiry to speak up and be heard — but not both.
In a guest contribution published on Thursday in The Daily Princetonian, Joan Scott falls into this precise trap. While defending the right to host this past Friday’s conference, entitled “The Anti-Zionist Idea: History, Theory, and Politics,” she simultaneously seeks to delegitimize and silence Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91 for expressing concern about its framing and impact, suggesting that his advocacy on behalf of Jewish students is somehow a threat to academic freedom rather than an exercise of it.
A topic of recent debate in the media and on college campuses is the Pentagon’s decision to sever ties with several Ivy League and elite universities. This includes Princeton University. This move follows Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s characterization of these institutions as “ Woke Breeding Grounds.” The goal is not to prevent these men and women from attending college but instead to direct them towards institutions more ideologically aligned with the viewpoints of the current administration. While this is the administration's prerogative, as someone who has served in both the Marine Corps and the Army as an infantryman, and am now a Princeton student myself, I am skeptical about this move.
Active-duty military members should not be barred from educational choices if given the opportunity, especially at a time when attending college can determine your future, and where you have gone to school matters. It is also a blow aimed at the wrong people.
In a blistering report released Tuesday, Republicans on the House Education and Workforce Committee say campus antisemitism didn’t begin with the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel and isn’t confined to a handful of universities.
“Instead, antisemitism in higher education is a systemic problem that affects a broad swath of America’s colleges and universities,” the report states. “The evidence demonstrates that antisemitism on campus is driven by persistent leadership failures and radical faculty and student groups that legitimize and foment antisemitism in classrooms and on campus grounds. Meanwhile, universities with satellite campuses overseas are failing to stop antisemitism and live up to their stated goals of spreading Western values.”
Harvard President Alan M. Garber ’76 slammed the White House’s bid to politicize the approval of National Institutes of Health research funding as “unprecedented” during a Tuesday Zoom call with alumni.
Asked about threats to the University’s federal funding, Garber appeared to point to an executive order proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump last week that would give a board of political appointees final say over how NIH money is spent. He also seemed to cite an Office of Management and Budget rule proposed earlier this year that would have put senior political appointees in charge of grant disbursement.
Click here for link to full article
Universities may be tempted to treat these capabilities as inevitable improvements in education. Students will be able to consume vast amounts of information, more than ever before. But like AI writing itself, such consumption would be vast but shallow. The more interesting possibility, then, is that AI will force universities to rediscover the value of intellectual work that cannot be outsourced.
Two Princeton University professors and a former professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary were awarded grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) in July. The new $41.4 million wave of humanities funding follows a legal battle regarding the future of federal support for the humanities.
RocaNews is one of those new platforms growing by the seemingly simple acts of building trust and conducting on-the-ground reporting in the places the New York Times promised to do. They believe their readers are smart enough to form their own opinions. At least that was being claimed on February 19th in McCosh Hall at an event entitled RocaNews, Non-Partisan Reporting, and the Fight against Legacy Media organized by the Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC). RocaNews currently has 2 million instagram followers, 651,000 YouTube subscribers, and a daily newsletter sent to over 200,000 subscribers. If that growth is not enough to convince you that they are doing something right, you can see for yourself through a myriad of ways, all focused on ease of access and user experience. Roca uses Instagram and newsletters to build a go-to news community based on factual, on-the-ground reporting.
The Trump administration wants to streamline its existing higher education accountability measures with a new earnings test, holding all postsecondary programs to the same standard—regardless of the certification level or institution type involved. But doing so could water down an existing accountability measure for certificates and for-profit programs.
Under a new policy proposal, released by the Department of Education late last week, undergraduate programs would be required to show that on average their graduates earn more than a working adult with a high school degree. Programs that fail to meet those standards for multiple years could lose access to all federal loans.
Attorneys with the US Department of Justice have reportedly said they felt pressured to accuse the University of California of discriminating against Jewish students and faculty, at the urging of the Trump administration, in what one lawyer described as a “hit job”.
Nine attorneys, some of whom requested anonymity, shared insider accounts with the Los Angeles Times of the federal government’s investigation into California’s research university system. The attorneys said they felt pushed to conclude the UC had violated the law before they had determined the facts. All of the attorneys eventually resigned.
A group of students and professors at public universities across Alabama are asking an appeals court to halt a state law that bans diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in public schools and prohibits the endorsement of what Republican lawmakers dubbed “divisive concepts” related to race and gender.
The Alabama measure, which took effect in October 2024, is part of a wave of proposals from Republican lawmakers across the country taking aim at DEI programs on college campuses.
Josh Moody
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: Six months into his second term, President Donald Trump has forced changes at many of the nation’s wealthiest universities, some of which have shed hundreds of jobs amid federal funding issues and investigations.
While sector layoffs are so frequent that Inside Higher Ed has dedicated monthly coverage to rounding up such reductions, those actions are more common at small, cash-strapped colleges or state institutions reeling from budget cuts. But universities with multibillion-dollar endowments have been among those making the deepest cuts in the first half of 2025, often driven by freezes on federal funding that the Trump administration imposed with minimal notice.
Johanna Alonso
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: More than three months after a federal court struck down an Education Department directive that barred any practices that consider race at colleges across the country, the Department of Justice declared Wednesday that diversity, equity and inclusion practices are unlawful and “discriminatory.”
But the agency’s memo goes even further than ED’s guidance, suggesting that programs that rely on what they describe as stand-ins for race, like recruitment efforts that focus on majority-minority geographic areas, could violate federal civil rights laws. The directive applies to any organization that receives federal funds, and DOJ officials warned that engaging in potentially unlawful practices could lead to a loss in grant funding.
Chris Cooper
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: It is worth noting that most DEI initiatives and offices on campus offer noncontroversial services like tutoring, mental health counseling and accessibility services like sign language interpreters. But the public and politicians were forming their opinions of DEI based on the voices of those with the megaphones and lucrative book contracts.
Current legislation targeting DEI upholds the most radical media-amplified voices as representative of the whole, even though these voices have been largely unsuccessful on many public campuses. Our university is not Columbia or Harvard, yet it seems as if legislators are attempting to punish our institution for the sins of its private counterparts. But when there are no loud moderate voices, how can we expect the public to see anything other than the extremes?
Jennifer Ruth
Academe Blog
Excerpt: Yesterday, the Department of Education announced investigations into Columbia University, Northwestern University, Portland State University, the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Minnesota–Twin Cities, explaining that “widespread antisemitic harassment has been reported” at these five institutions.
Given the confusion that reigns in and over higher education today, it’s worth trying to think this through a bit.
Khoa Sands ‘26
Elite academia has been dominated by the question of free speech and free expression over the past year. 2024 has seen the explosion of pro-Palestine campus protests, throwing institutions into disarray. At Harvard, UCLA, Columbia, and other universities, administrators struggled to respond as activists occupied campus and harassed other students. Scenes of chaotic fighting at UCLA were played on televisions across the country.
Former University President Lee Bollinger, Law ’71, called on universities to take “collective action” against President Donald Trump’s administration amid its “authoritarian assault” on higher education in his first interview with Spectator since stepping down from the presidency in May 2023.
Since leaving his post after more than two decades as Columbia’s 19th president, the University has cycled through three presidents—Minouche Shafik, Katrina Armstrong, and Claire Shipman, CC ’86, SIPA ’94—as it experienced intense national scrutiny for its response to campus protests over the war in Gaza.
When the College announced its policy of institutional restraint in December 2024, it entered uncharted territory. There was no precedent for such a policy in Dartmouth’s history, which left room for much debate over its implications. Now, however, the policy has found its analogue in a surprising place — not at another university, but at the CBS headquarters in Midtown Manhattan.
And yet, rather than reassuring us about Dartmouth’s policy, the case at CBS News is quickly becoming an omen about what exactly could go wrong with institutional neutrality at Dartmouth, and how a policy designed to promote free speech could be co-opted just as quickly to restrict it.
On paper, freshly hired University of Virginia president Scott C. Beardsley appears to have all the bona fides of a qualified higher ed leader: multiple advanced degrees and more than a decade of experience leading a top business school. But that has not stymied outrage about his selection.
Last month the Virginia Board of Visitors voted to elevate him from business school dean to the top job, filling a vacancy left by former president James Ryan, who resigned under pressure as board leadership negotiated an agreement with the Department of Justice to close investigations into alleged civil rights infractions. Ryan has since accused the board of being complicit in his ouster.
Jeff Yass
The Free Press
Excerpt: I am giving $100 million to the University of Austin because the feedback mechanisms of higher education are broken.
Almost every system that works, works because of feedback. Evolution works because helpful mutations survive while harmful ones die off. Democracy works because voters support effective leaders and remove ineffective ones. Markets work because prices tell producers when to ramp up or scale back. Science works because the data from an experiment tells the scientist how likely their hypothesis is to be false.
Daniel Miller and Jaweed Kaleem
LA Times
Excerpt: The University of Southern California on Thursday rejected the controversial education compact the Trump administration offered it and eight other schools, saying it would undermine “values of free inquiry and academic excellence.”
Henry F. Haidar
Harvard Crimson
Excerpt: Out of all the faculty The Crimson recently surveyed, only one percent described their political beliefs as very conservative. Think about that: someone is three times more likely to get into Harvard than to encounter a conservative faculty member here.
Much can be — and has been — said in favor of viewpoint diversity in higher education. Yet those decrying the relative lack of conservative faculty overlooks a basic point: The structure of universities themselves lends itself to a professoriate whose politics do not perfectly map on to that of the public writ large. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Academic Freedom Alliance statement on the assassination of Charlie Kirk
The Academic Freedom Alliance (AFA) is a coalition of faculty from across the country and across the ideological spectrum who are dedicated
to upholding the principles of academic freedom and free speech for faculty at colleges and universities throughout the US.
Located in Princeton, the AFA was founded by Keith Whittington, former Princeton professor of Politics now a professor at Yale Law School; Robert P. George, a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton; public intellectual and former Princeton professor Cornel West; Jeannie Suk Gersen, a professor of law at Harvard Law School; and Nadine Strossen, the former national President of the American Civil Liberties Union and professor emerita at New York Law School. Since its founding in 2021 the AFA has grown its membership to over 900 faculty from across the country.
Jeannie Suk Gersen
New Yorker
Excerpt: Last time U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs sided with Harvard in a case about the university’s alleged discrimination, it ended with the Supreme Court declaring race-conscious admissions unlawful at schools across the country. Harvard won its battle in the lower court on the way to losing the broader war.
On Wednesday, Judge Burroughs gave Harvard a win that vindicated broad principles at stake for universities and the rule of law. But the victory will not end Harvard’s pain, and it remains to be seen whether higher education can triumph in the end.
