Having casually attended one of these schools, I'm so confused about why they are even in this group. What is making this group of schools best suited for this sort of blackmail?
I'm glad to see states fighting back, finally. I was never really too sure if, from a purely academic point of view, I thought a stronger federal government ("united we stand, divided we fall") or more independent states were a better "system".
But I think the way the US is set up (districting, gerrymandering, redlined, electoral college, etc) makes it far too easy for fringe beliefs to take over and dictate policy. So having states simply being more independent puts up far more barriers to all of us just losing our freedom.
I live in IL. (Not near Chicago). My kids public school only gets about 15% of its funding from the federal govt. We could just finally stop having our stupid flat income tax and make up the shortfall. It might set back the universal preschool system, perhaps (which would be a tragedy but better than complete destruction).
Meanwhile, schools might not even exist in many other states if federal funding disappeared.
1.Equality in admissions- with certain exceptions, universities have to publish and commit to objective criteria for accepting new students.
2.Marketplace of ideas and civil discourse - a bit vague, but basically calling for non violent exchanges of opinions and ideas, specifically not discriminating against conservatives, who frankly are a significant minority at universities.
3.Nondiscrimination in faculty and administrative hiring
4.Institutional neutrality - frankly i'm not sure what that's supposed to mean
5.Student learning -Signatories must make certain “grade integrity” commitments, including neither “inflat[ing]” nor “deflat[ing]” grades for any “non-academic reason.”
6.Student equality -Signatories must treat students “as individuals and not on the basis of their immutable characteristics, with due exceptions for sex-based privacy, safety, and fairness”
7.Financial responsibility - a raft of ideas aimed at protecting students
8. More restrictions on foreign student admissions etc.
Many schools without huge endowments are in a tough spot, they really need the federal money but it goes against everything that they have fought for, for a very long time. I don’t envy those having to make these decisions.
We've observed what happens when you cave to Trump and his goons: they will want more and turn on you anyway. ABC settled and paid Trump $16M just for his FCC chair to later threaten their license over Jimmy Kimmel's comments. I'm glad these universities have a spine and aren't signing onto this attempt at an authoritarian takeover of higher education.
This push to force ideological “balance” on universities is incredibly dangerous. The pursuit of truth is difficult and has its pitfalls but it naturally leads to the dominance of certain viewpoints, which hopefully approximate the truth.
What the Feds are doing here is just a hop skip and a jump from forcing universities to hire young Earth creationists alongside archaeologists, climate change deniers alongside climate scientists, etc.
Universities and the research they do must inform politics, but the reverse risks destroying the research enterprise all together.
If I'm one of these universities, the rational course of action is to say no. Because you never know when this administration will change its mind, or try to change the terms of the deal and impose new conditions. I think the only reason for some universities to delay coming with an answer is that they have to first have a conversation with their biggest donors, and make sure they don't upset them.
16 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 46.2 ms ] threadNo response yet (due tomorrow BTW) from: Vanderbilt University of Texas University of Arizona
But I think the way the US is set up (districting, gerrymandering, redlined, electoral college, etc) makes it far too easy for fringe beliefs to take over and dictate policy. So having states simply being more independent puts up far more barriers to all of us just losing our freedom.
I live in IL. (Not near Chicago). My kids public school only gets about 15% of its funding from the federal govt. We could just finally stop having our stupid flat income tax and make up the shortfall. It might set back the universal preschool system, perhaps (which would be a tragedy but better than complete destruction).
Meanwhile, schools might not even exist in many other states if federal funding disappeared.
1.Equality in admissions- with certain exceptions, universities have to publish and commit to objective criteria for accepting new students.
2.Marketplace of ideas and civil discourse - a bit vague, but basically calling for non violent exchanges of opinions and ideas, specifically not discriminating against conservatives, who frankly are a significant minority at universities.
3.Nondiscrimination in faculty and administrative hiring
4.Institutional neutrality - frankly i'm not sure what that's supposed to mean
5.Student learning -Signatories must make certain “grade integrity” commitments, including neither “inflat[ing]” nor “deflat[ing]” grades for any “non-academic reason.”
6.Student equality -Signatories must treat students “as individuals and not on the basis of their immutable characteristics, with due exceptions for sex-based privacy, safety, and fairness”
7.Financial responsibility - a raft of ideas aimed at protecting students
8. More restrictions on foreign student admissions etc.
9.enforcement
[1]i got all my information from this article:https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/10/white-h...
What the Feds are doing here is just a hop skip and a jump from forcing universities to hire young Earth creationists alongside archaeologists, climate change deniers alongside climate scientists, etc.
Universities and the research they do must inform politics, but the reverse risks destroying the research enterprise all together.
https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/...