Claire Murphy and Brock Read
Chronicle of Higher Education
Excerpt: Nine universities are currently weighing whether to adopt the Trump administration’s proposed “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” which would require them to make a wide-ranging series of commitments to uphold admissions and hiring practices, foster “viewpoint diversity,” and cap international enrollment, among other items.
The letter set an October 20 deadline for “limited, targeted feedback” on the compact, leaving university leaders scrambling to evaluate its terms. The Chronicle is documenting official university responses to the document, along with faculty statements, as they are made public.
FIRE
Excerpt: FIRE is suing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to challenge two federal immigration law provisions that give him unchecked power to revoke legal immigrants’ visas and deport them just for speech protected by the First Amendment.
One of our plaintiffs is the student-run paper The Stanford Daily, where writers on student visas are turning down assignments related to the war in Gaza because they fear reporting on it could endanger their immigration status. We are also representing two legal noncitizens who engaged in pro-Palestinian speech and now fear being deported.
Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: The Trump administration announced last week it was freezing federal grants for another prestigious research university. But this time, it wasn’t a private institution.
It was the University of California, Los Angeles, and if the UC system doesn’t make a deal with the federal government, campuses across one of the nation’s largest public higher education systems might incur the administration’s further punishment. State leaders condemned the funding freeze, and faculty at UCLA are urging university administrators to fight. But the university has said little about how it plans to respond to the administration.
Rose Horowitch
The Atlantic
Excerpt: To do the same thing over and over and expect a different result is one definition of insanity. According to Robert Shibley, a special counsel of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), it’s also Columbia University’s approach to addressing anti-Semitism on campus.
On Tuesday, Claire Shipman, Columbia’s acting president, announced in an email to the community that the university would take several steps to quell anti-Semitism on campus. Columbia will appoint Title VI and Title VII coordinators to review allegations of discrimination. It will launch new programming around anti-Jewish discrimination, send out regular messages affirming its zero-tolerance policy on hate, and use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism for certain disciplinary proceedings.
Thomas Chatterton Williams
The Atlantic
Excerpt: President Donald Trump’s assault on what he broadly calls DEI has been slapdash and sadistic. That doesn’t mean the system under attack should be maintained. Racial preferencing in university admissions as well as in employment and government contracting—more commonly understood as affirmative action—might once have been necessary, but long ago became glaringly unfair in practice.
Affirmative action in college admissions continues—despite being banned by the Supreme Court in 2023—through the use of personal essays, interviews, and other proxy mechanisms. It continues in businesses’ hirings and promotions. It’s possible to believe two truths simultaneously: Judging individuals by race instead of merit has to end, in no small part because it hurts the very people it is supposed to uplift; and Trump’s approach to ending it is harmful.
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.
Spencer S. Hsu and Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff
Washington Post
Excerpt: Interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin demanded that the dean of Georgetown Law School end all diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the school, asserting in a letter that his office will not consider hiring anyone affiliated with a university that utilizes DEI.
Cathy Young
The Bulwark
Excerpt: Among the avalanche of executive orders that Donald Trump loosed upon his return to power are several related to high-profile culture-war issues. Foremost among these is a pair of executive orders relating to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI, sometimes known as DEIA for “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility”). One bans DEI programs in the federal workforce and corporations with federal contracts. The other directs the government to investigate “DEI discrimination and preferences” across the private sector, including large academic institutions.
Many critiques of identity politics have been valid and necessary. But DEI opponents should be wary of linking their cause to the Trump administration, which is all but certain to use colorblind fairness as a smokescreen for anti-woke identity politics—and which has started its first week with a spree of presidential lawlessness.
Aaron Sibarium
Washington Free Beacon
Excerpt: Amy Wax, the tenured law professor who was sanctioned for her controversial remarks about racial issues, sued the University of Pennsylvania on Thursday for breach of contract and race discrimination, putting a dispute over tenure and academic freedom that has dragged on for almost three years into the hands of a federal court. The complaint comes after Wax was suspended for a year at half-pay and stripped of her named chair, penalties the lawsuit says are "illegal multiple times over."
Jonathan Feingold
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: Trump is coming for higher education. His congressional allies are already armed with measures like HR 6848, which would ban universities from inviting statements that document a professor’s “past or planned contributions to efforts involving diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
Outlawing DEI statements makes sense for a president who loves to vilify America’s universities and discredit their democratic commitments. What might be less obvious is that bills like HR 6848, because they curtail university autonomy and undermine DEI initiatives, threaten one of higher education’s most sacred values: academic freedom.
Curtis Bunn
MSNBC
Excerpt: One by one, diversity, equity and inclusion programs at some of the country’s biggest companies fell apart in 2024, with signs that efforts to reverse DEI initiatives will only ramp up in 2025.
This year saw the rise in prominent figures like Elon Musk and Lululemon founder Chip Wilson, among others, who vocally pushed against DEI initiatives. Major companies, including Walmart, Lowe’s, Ford and Toyota, heeded the calls and dialed back their DEI programs, particularly after social media-driven campaigns by influencers like Robby Starbuck.
Isaac Barsoum
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Leftists at Princeton cheer the assassination of Charlie Kirk — at least, that’s what you would think if you’ve been reading the Opinion section of this newspaper lately. On Sept. 17, Tigers for Israel President Maximillian Meyer ’27 declared that Princeton’s progressives exhibit “a willingness to cheer violence itself.” Princeton Tory Publisher Zach Gardner ’26 didn’t go quite so far, but did say that students “treat bloodshed flippantly,” at least in the context of Kirk’s assassination.
Here’s one problem: large portions of both their arguments rest on evidence drawn from Fizz. For the uninitiated, Fizz is a campus social media app where any Princeton student can say anything at all, true or false, behind the veil of anonymity. It is remarkable that I have to say this: Fizz is not real life.
Maximillian Meyer
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Members of the far-left have spent years talking down to the American people from a position of self-styled moral superiority. They have scolded that it is racist to support the police, transphobic to seek to keep biological men out of women’s sports, and emboldening of Nazis to dare to support President Trump.
Rhetoric reducing political opponents to “Nazis” excuses people from ever having to engage with the other side. And when the core values of honest dissent and earnest dialogue slip out of the political arena, it’s all too easy for violence to fill the void.
Andrew Bosworth and Hellen Luo
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: A flurry of Trump administration executive orders and memos have paused, blocked, and then unblocked various streams of federal research funding since taking office, leaving scientists confused about their funding.
In his Jan. 28 email to the campus community, University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 acknowledged the confusion surrounding funding, writing that “you can expect to receive guidance from the Office of the Dean for Research, which is coordinating University-wide efforts.”
Abigail Rabieh
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: It’s been my belief that going outside of Princeton to complain about Princeton’s functioning is always wrong. The benefit of a small community is precisely its opportunity to voice your beliefs in an open forum, one that is easy to access and easy to get responses. It is not hard to publish a letter in the ‘Prince,’ and the entire undergraduate community can be accessed via an email listserv. This, of course, guarantees no changes — I know well that the University is not accountable to its constituents. But that’s just the nature of the University: it’s a place where you subordinate yourself to receive an education.
It seems I’ve been playing by outdated rules, however, because this is not how most people interact with Princeton.
As a professor who is known to dissent from progressive ideologies that are dominant at universities such as Princeton, where I’ve taught for nearly 40 years, I’m frequently asked by students for advice about how to navigate a campus they worry will be hostile to them. Some are pro-Israel, or politically and socially conservative, or religiously observant.
They fear being treated unfairly by faculty members who are hostile to their beliefs. Many are afraid of being regarded as outcasts by their more liberal or progressive peers. They worry about being excluded from academic opportunities or not treated equitably in social or other extracurricular activities. To these students I say, with regret: You’re right to worry. I’ve seen these things happen.
Tyler Coward, Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression
Excerpt: Freedom thrives when the people, not bureaucrats, decide which ideas are worthy of discussion, debate, or support. As FIRE has long argued, campus reform is necessary. But overreaching government coercion that tries to end-run around the First Amendment to impose an official orthodoxy is unacceptable. And the White House’s new Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education raises red flags.
The compact includes troubling language, such as calling on institutions to eliminate departments deemed to “purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.” Let’s be clear: Speech that offends or criticizes political views is not violence. Conflating words with violence undermines both free speech and efforts to combat real threats.
Dan Mangan
CNBC
Excerpt: The U.S. Department of Education said Wednesday that Columbia University has failed to meet the standards for accreditation because the Ivy League school “is in violation of federal antidiscrimination laws” for allegedly tolerating harassment of Jewish students on campus.
The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights notified the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, an accrediting institution that Columbia belongs to, of the alleged violation. The department noted that by federal regulations, “accreditors are required to notify any member institution about a federal noncompliance finding and establish a plan to come into compliance.”
Jonah Valdez
The Intercept
Excerpt: In March, a group of scholars filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration to block the government from detaining and deporting students and professors for speaking out about Palestine.
Now, as the case heads to trial in Massachusetts federal court in July, those professors and students worry they may be targeted by immigration officials for speaking out in the courtroom on the witness stand.
Nicole Barbaro Simovski, Ph.D.
Free the Inquiry, Heterodox Academy, Substack
Excerpt: Diversity statements started to be commonly required for applications for university faculty positions starting in the 2010s. These statements—often one- to two-page essays detailing a candidate's commitment to advancing diversity, enquiry, and inclusion goals in their academic work—have been a fierce topic of debate. On the extremes, one side sees diversity statements as simply asking faculty candidates to demonstrate how they advance the university’s values. The other side sees them as thinly veiled ideological filters in hiring.
After a decade, following intense controversy over the use of these statements in hiring, the UC system has officially put an end to the practice.
Nicole Barbaro Simovski, Ph.D.
Free the Inquiry
Excerpt: Diversity statements started to be commonly required for applications for university faculty positions starting in the 2010s. These statements—often one- to two-page essays detailing a candidate's commitment to advancing diversity, enquiry, and inclusion goals in their academic work—have been a fierce topic of debate. On the extremes, one side sees diversity statements as simply asking faculty candidates to demonstrate how they advance the university’s values. The other side sees them as thinly veiled ideological filters in hiring.
Kyle Cheney
Politico
Excerpt: A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump’s bid to deprive federal funding from programs that incorporate “diversity, equity and inclusion” initiatives.
U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson ruled that Trump’s policy likely violates the First Amendment because it penalizes private organizations based on their viewpoints. And the judge said the policy is written so vaguely that it chills the free speech of federal contractors concerned they will be punished if they don’t eliminate programs meant to encourage a diverse workforce.
Katherine Knott
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: A federal district judge in Kentucky tossed out President Biden’s overhaul of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, ruling Thursday that the regulations exceeded the department’s statutory authority and violated the U.S. Constitution.
The Education Department is now unable to enforce the new regulations, which took effect last summer following a lengthy process to rewrite a rule put in place by the first Trump administration. The decision was part of a lawsuit brought by Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.
Chris Linder
Inside Higher Ed
I was a victim advocate on a college campus for seven years. Since 2011, I have worked as a faculty member whose research, teaching and activism focuses on addressing sexual violence among college students. And for the past five years, I’ve led the development of a center for violence prevention on a campus where three women were murdered by domestic or dating partners in one year, followed by an additional alleged domestic violence homicide four years later.
Few things make me more ashamed or angry than the way the federal government attempts to intervene in sexual misconduct on college campuses. Politicians use survivors and transgender students as pawns in a political power struggle.
