My reflections on the 2024 election cycle and Trump's 2nd coming included a lot of gloom and doom. One of the issues that drove the gloom was the seeming lack of push back to Trump's tidal wave of executive orders, a barrage that frequently tests the boundaries of separation of powers as well as the very foundations of the U.S. Constitution. Law suits to challenge Trump's directives are so numerous that Inside Higher Education is tracking them in updates. One of the first challenges to reach the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Trump administration withdrawal of funding to 8 states' grants for DEI teaching training.
The Education Department's "Dear Colleague" notice to eliminate all DEI within 2 weeks created uncertainty about what was viewed as DEI, making the task of scrubbing exceptionally challenging. The lack of specificity and timetable are complicated by the fact that the directive contradicts established case law, which raises the question of whether the directive was serious or just a way to sow chaos and create fear. Self-regulation in the face of threats led to wide reduction or elimination of diversity-related programs; even the DEI programs at the University of Michigan were shuttered. The response from the University of Maryland law faculty clarified a number of issues in response to the directive. Part of Trump's anti-DEI directive was blocked by a Federal Judge who offered the opinion that the "language related to canceling equity-related grants was too vague and invited 'arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement'" and the NEA sued to block it as well. The nationwide injunction against Trump's orders was reversed, but the 3 appeal judges opined that how broadly or narrowly the Dear Colleague letter was enforced was the primary issue to watch. The date for compliance with the "Dear Colleague" letter was pushed back as law suits to block it entirely loomed.
Shawn Harper, diversity scholar at the University of Southern California, offered 11 recommendations for institutions to retain a commitment to DEI in the face of the Education Department's "Dear Colleague" letter, which lacked details and will require considerable time and effort to enforce. Subsequent Education Department guidance allowed observances such as Black History Month, "so long as they do not engage in racial exclusion or discrimination." Condolezza Rice's declaration from years ago that it was "inappropriate to teach about structural racism... because it makes white students 'feel bad for being white'" seems trivial in comparison to Black students' experience when they were the first to break through segregation in higher education. Community colleges are now being pressured to eliminate DEI programs, although elite universities were hit first.
Perhaps the defense of higher education is emerging. Reading the summary of the recent American Council on Education meeting included the declaration of the organization's President, Ted Mitchell, that "We're under attack" and "These executive orders are an assault on American opportunity and leadership." This ACE meeting included a lot of hand-ringing but closed with the hopeful voice of Freeman Hrabowski, ACE Fellow and president emeritus of the University of Maryland Baltimore County. Hrabowski admonished those in attendance to "use our heads and our hearts," a lesson he learned from participating in the civil rights march in Birmingham, Ala., 60 years ago. "Faith and determination" convinced him that "we would be OK." Faith-based institutions may be able to invoke 1st Amendment guarantees to resist imposition of DEI bans.
The irony of the ACE meeting location could not be more profound - The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. where musicians and artists are resigning their posts and performers are cancelling appearances in the face of Trump's take-over with cronies in board seats and himself as the chair. Audio of Trump's meeting with the board he installed pledge replacing the "wokey" perspective of the center with something that will be "hot" again, like he has made the U.S. Presidency. The Brookings Institute warned that control of free expression in music and other arts organizations is classic authoritarianism. Trump's take over of the Kennedy Center as well as executive orders that prohibit diversity programs among National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities puts all arts at risk. Targeting another critical area, J.D. Vance will be in charge of implementing Trump's "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," which will include investigating the Smithsonian and National Zoo.
As an amateur musician who has performed with the National Symphony Orchestra at the Kennedy Center under the baton of Antal Dorati and enjoyed a lifetime of music patronage and participation, taking over the Kennedy Center is one of the most bizarre and dangerous moves of a President in pursuit of authoritarian and restrictive rule. My hope and prediction is that artists throughout the U.S. and around the world will call out Trump's take-over for what it is - censorship of the arts.
Trump has signaled his intent to reshape education for many years. The campaign promise "to reclaim our once great educational institutions from the radical left and Marxist maniacs" was one of Trump's clearest statements of his intent. It's fairly easy to see that beneath the guise of fighting anti-Semitism, including redefining it to conform to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, was more about ideologic control than anything else.
With a few notable exceptions, presidents of higher education institutions have remained oddly silent during the early stages of Trump's intervention though survey results of sitting presidents confirm their concerns over the elimination of the Education Department and credibility among the public. The President of the Council of Independent Colleges says that, while diverse in perspective, many presidents are responding with quiet resistance. Adaptive leadership that considers the context of each institution may be one way to formulate a response to the chaos. Self-censorship is not a strategy for self-preservation is the advice offered by some faculty who believe that the threats to higher education have reached a turning point. Threats to free speech are real and institutions must be careful in how they advise students related to activism while being strategic in rebuilding trust and voicing opposition to Trump administration actions. Student responses in defense of higher education have been limited thus far and any future resistance is complicated by lack of public support. Three-fourths of students believe that their institutions promote free speech but only about 50% say that they are comfortable discussing Israel and Palestine issues. Unions may be one of the most important sources of resistance, relying on pulling concerned individuals and groups together.
Trump's attack, and capitulation by Columbia University's President Armstrong, is not a good sign and could establish a precedent that will impact other institutions. Education Secretary McMahon's pronouncement that Columbia is on the "right track" to restore funding may actually not be helpful in the face of faculty who pushed for confrontation rather than appeasement. It is unclear if the push-back caused Armstrong's move back to leadership of the Med School and subsequently to take a sabbatical leave. The AAUP filed suit on behalf of Columbia faculty asserting that the threat of funding cuts were a "cudgel to coerce a private institution to adopt restrictive speech codes and allow government control." The announcement of Claire Shipman as interim-President in the aftermath of Trump administration demands on Columbia signals a variety of things and what happens going forward will be one of the most interesting higher education leadership cases to watch in the coming months.
Public opinion is an important driver of the conversation about education and the majority do not support funding cuts for education. Responses will need to mobilize grass roots organizing principles that draw diverse groups to act together. Numerous institutions have begun to adopt statement neutrality in an apparent effort to avoid accusations of viewpoint bias. A Heterodox report lauds neutrality by saying "these policies represent a critical step toward restoring universities as trusted spaces for free inquiry and intellectual growth."
Perhaps the current complacency is the result of fear, perhaps disbelief that the chaos is serious. The energy to fight back may be building with possible activism coming even from conservative corners in reaction to Musk, whose leadership of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency has been sloppy and resulted in numerous reversals. McMahon announced a meeting to brief employees on the "final mission" of the Education Department, which was then cancelled after rumors of Trump's executive order to eliminate it. Approximately half of Education Department staff were fired on February 11, 2025, with promises to return responsibility to the states. A court order required the Education Department to rehire some probationary employees as more law suits followed from education groups. Dismantling research capability and financial assistance to students are at least two areas where impact is most likely. The false starts and changes are Trump's hallmark and demoralize everyone involved. Education Department staff reeling in the face of lay-offs is only one example. Democrats have begun to actively criticize McMahon's cuts to the Department staff.
With Trump signing the Executive Order to eliminate the Education Department on March 20, 2025, the question of defense of higher education elevated to a different level. Although an Executive Order cannot undo an act of Congress, Republican legislative action is sure to follow.
