Federal Control: The Hidden Agenda Behind Trump's Higher Education Compact
The University of Virginia and Cornell have signed agreements with the federal government, touted as compromises that allowed these institutions to preserve their autonomy. However, a closer examination reveals a far more sinister deal - one that subjects these universities to federal control, undermines academic freedom, and sets a perilous precedent for higher education in America.
At its core, President Trump's compact is thinly veiled attempt at federal takeover of state and private institutions. The agreements with UVA and Cornell appear to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, safeguarding academic freedom, and avoiding external monitoring or monetary penalties. But the reality is more nuanced.
UVA's deal provides that if the university makes unspecified changes to its DEI programs, the federal government will close currently open investigations into the university. However, this agreement does not provide a clear path for UVA to exit these investigations; instead, it contractsually binds the university to the Trump administration's definition of discrimination. This definition outstrips anything required by law and may force UVA to violate statutory and constitutional law.
The University of Virginia's student body has never looked like its state, with Black students being severely underrepresented. The agreement forecloses all efforts to pursue the perfectly constitutional goal of increasing racial diversity in a state with a long history of discrimination and exclusion. Moreover, the agreement places UVA in grave financial jeopardy by reserving the right for the federal government to terminate the agreement at any time.
The administration's guidance is riddled with ambiguities and internal contradictions, making it difficult to determine what is permissible under these agreements. For instance, if a university provides an admissions boost to students who have experienced economic hardship or are first-generation college students, would that violate its agreement? The ambiguity creates a chilling effect, where universities may avoid any speech or conduct that might attract negative attention from the Trump administration.
Both agreements affirm "academic freedom" and promise no interference with curricula or the free expression of ideas. However, if universities can be subject to drastic financial penalties anytime the federal government decides it is not complying, it creates a strong incentive for administrators, faculty, and students to self-censor. This federal control cuts to the heart of the freedom of inquiry that allows universities to contribute to innovation, economic prosperity, and knowledge creation.
The refusal of university leaders to sign Trump's compact is courageous and important. However, bespoke deals like these set a perilous precedent that should alarm all Americans. As we move forward, it is essential to recognize that federal control over higher education is not a solution but a threat to the very foundations of academic freedom and innovation.
**Author's note:** This article was written with Amanda Shanor and Serena Mayeri, law professors at the University of Pennsylvania.
The University of Virginia and Cornell have signed agreements with the federal government, touted as compromises that allowed these institutions to preserve their autonomy. However, a closer examination reveals a far more sinister deal - one that subjects these universities to federal control, undermines academic freedom, and sets a perilous precedent for higher education in America.
At its core, President Trump's compact is thinly veiled attempt at federal takeover of state and private institutions. The agreements with UVA and Cornell appear to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, safeguarding academic freedom, and avoiding external monitoring or monetary penalties. But the reality is more nuanced.
UVA's deal provides that if the university makes unspecified changes to its DEI programs, the federal government will close currently open investigations into the university. However, this agreement does not provide a clear path for UVA to exit these investigations; instead, it contractsually binds the university to the Trump administration's definition of discrimination. This definition outstrips anything required by law and may force UVA to violate statutory and constitutional law.
The University of Virginia's student body has never looked like its state, with Black students being severely underrepresented. The agreement forecloses all efforts to pursue the perfectly constitutional goal of increasing racial diversity in a state with a long history of discrimination and exclusion. Moreover, the agreement places UVA in grave financial jeopardy by reserving the right for the federal government to terminate the agreement at any time.
The administration's guidance is riddled with ambiguities and internal contradictions, making it difficult to determine what is permissible under these agreements. For instance, if a university provides an admissions boost to students who have experienced economic hardship or are first-generation college students, would that violate its agreement? The ambiguity creates a chilling effect, where universities may avoid any speech or conduct that might attract negative attention from the Trump administration.
Both agreements affirm "academic freedom" and promise no interference with curricula or the free expression of ideas. However, if universities can be subject to drastic financial penalties anytime the federal government decides it is not complying, it creates a strong incentive for administrators, faculty, and students to self-censor. This federal control cuts to the heart of the freedom of inquiry that allows universities to contribute to innovation, economic prosperity, and knowledge creation.
The refusal of university leaders to sign Trump's compact is courageous and important. However, bespoke deals like these set a perilous precedent that should alarm all Americans. As we move forward, it is essential to recognize that federal control over higher education is not a solution but a threat to the very foundations of academic freedom and innovation.
**Author's note:** This article was written with Amanda Shanor and Serena Mayeri, law professors at the University of Pennsylvania.
. So Trump's trying to sell these universities on his "compromise" agreement, but let's be real, it's a total Trojan horse 
. He's basically saying "we'll let you keep your autonomy... as long as we get what we want". And what he wants is to dictate how diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are run in these institutions. It's like, totally not okay 
.
If they make some "changes" to their DEI programs, the feds will close down any investigations that are currently going on... but there's no clear way for them to actually get out of those investigations. It's like, they're stuck in this perpetual limbo 
.
. Trump's definition of discrimination is way more narrow than what the law actually says, so basically he's saying that any university that tries to address systemic racism or inequality will be violating the law 
.
. If universities start self-censoring because they're afraid of federal backlash, it's a total recipe for disaster 
. We need to make sure our institutions are protected from this kind of overreach 
.
it sounds like they're trying to control what gets taught in schools and universities, and that's super scary for a country that values knowledge and freedom of thought 
I mean, if the government can just dictate how universities operate, doesn't that undermine the very idea of education being free? 
! The idea that universities are signing deals that basically allow the federal government to control them is super concerning 
And if universities are forced to self-censor because of the threat of financial penalties, that's a total game-changer. We gotta keep those institutions free and independent 
.
. It's like, how far can this go? Will other states and private schools be expected to follow suit too? The thought of federal control over our educational institutions is giving me the heebie-jeebies 
.
. That takes a lot of courage, especially when it comes to standing up for academic freedom and innovation 
. Anyway, just wanted to share my thoughts on this...
universities should be free to make their own decisions not some puppet on strings 
u mean to tell me that just bc they wanna be "inclusive" they gotta compromise their autonomy like that? 
. So they've basically told these universities that if they don't do exactly what they say, their federal funding will be cut off 
. And it's not just about the money, it's like they're trying to control every aspect of academia and stifle free speech 
. I mean, who needs diversity and inclusion programs if you can just get a degree from anywhere? 
The fact that these universities are even agreeing to this is wild 
No thanks, I'm not buying it 
this whole thing just feels like a slippery slope to me... once they start controlling education, where does it end? 
. Trump's Higher Education Compact sounds like a Trojan horse for federal control 
. It's like they're trying to create some kind of federal education police force 
.
. If universities want to prioritize certain issues over others, that's their prerogative 
. But when the feds start inserting themselves into every aspect of university life, that's a problem 
.
. We can't just let one administration waltz in and try to take over our universities without a fight 
!
. I mean, who gets to decide what's 'discrimination' anyway? 
. I don't think this is about 'academic freedom' at all, it's more like a power grab 
The idea of federal control over higher education is just plain scary 
. The irony is that they're trying to protect academic freedom but end up suffocating it 
.
. We should all be doing that too! This whole thing is just, like, totally not right 
I'm low-key freaked out about this deal between Trump and UVA/Cornell! Like, what's next? 
. At least we're having this conversation and thinking critically about what's going on. And the fact that UVA is refusing to sign the compact shows that there are still people who care about academic freedom and the integrity of our education system 
.
Can you blame them for wanting to avoid "discrimination" when they've been underrepresented for so long?