Universities Respond to Proposed Trump Administration Compact Linking Federal Funding and Academic Policies
“It’s extortion, plain and simple,” said Paja Faudree, an anthropology and linguistics professor at Brown. “There will be no end to the demands he makes of our university, and of other universities. This compact violates all of our values as a community.”
The 10-point document was sent to Brown, the University of Texas, MIT, Dartmouth, the University of Arizona, Vanderbilt University, the University of Virginia, the University of Southern California, and the University of Pennsylvania. These schools have until Nov. 21 to decide whether to sign or reject the compact.
Though other universities said last week that their officials are reviewing the proposal, Brown has yet to publicly comment on whether it will reject or sign the compact. Brown President Christina H. Paxson stated during a faculty meeting that she plans to consult with the Brown community.
If Brown were to sign, said Denise Davis, a gender and sexuality studies professor at Brown, “We’d become an instrument of the state.”
A protest Thursday was organized by Brown Rise Up, a group of faculty and students working to “resist authoritarianism in higher education,” according to sophomore Francisco Ramirez, one of the organizers.
“As the child of an immigrant, I have seen firsthand how systems use fear and policies to keep people silent and subservient,” said Ramirez. “This proposed compact is no different.”
Alex Shieh, a former student who recently dropped out to launch a private sector version of DOGE, supports a tuition freeze at Brown, which the compact requires.
“The fact that sky-high tuition at Brown has persisted for so long is why Americans no longer trust elite institutions to serve their interests,” Shieh told the Globe. “The compact promotes the fundamental American ideal of equality: equal access to education regardless of socioeconomic background, equal ability to voice one’s views, and equal opportunity to attend a top school irrespective of one’s race.”
Many higher education leaders and workers see the compact as a threat to academic freedom. On Thursday, Dartmouth professors delivered a petition with over 500 signatures to President Sian Leah Beilock, urging her not to sign it.
“The moment for you to exercise refusal in the name of Dartmouth’s academic integrity has arrived,” they wrote in the petition, dated Oct. 2.
“In order to preserve the integrity of our academic mission, you must refuse all unlawful demands and political threats that would undermine our academic freedom and self-governance,” the petition continued.
Prof. Pamela Voekel, who signed the petition, said there was concern about the executive branch asking for these demands. “There was a lot of discussion that the executive branch of government has no right at all to be asking for these things,” she said.
Beilock did not meet with the faculty but her secretary accepted the petition on her behalf. Dartmouth did not respond to requests for comment.
The compact also limits the percentage of international students—no more than 15 percent of undergraduates, with no more than 5 percent from any one country. Michael P. Steinberg, a professor at Brown, expressed concern that signing the compact would “compromise the integrity of my lectures and conversations in all of my classes,” emphasizing that international students enrich dialogue.
In addition to demands regarding tuition and admissions, the compact would restrict university employees’ actions and speech on societal and political issues, align with Trump’s definitions of gender, and establish rules against political demonstrations that disrupt study areas or harass students. It would also require schools to eliminate “institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.” Many professors point out they already welcome diverse viewpoints.
Some academics worry the compact could suppress open discussion on politically charged issues like climate change and gender identity. J. Timmons Roberts, from Brown’s Climate and Development Lab, indicated uncertainty about teaching if Brown signs it, noting that political polarization has increased since the 1990s, affecting bipartisan consensus on climate issues.
Free speech advocates also expressed concern. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) warned that the compact might violate the First Amendment, emphasizing that “speech that offends or criticizes political views is not violence.”
Further criticism comes from Annelise Orleck, a Dartmouth history professor, who called the compact a “draconian exercise of control over curriculum,” and highlighted the potential overreach of administration and government in university affairs.
“As I see the compact, it is the end of higher education as I have known it for my entire career,” she stated.