Columbia University said last week it would pay the federal government a US$200-million fine to restore federal research money.CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP/Getty Images
Debra Thompson is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail.
After Columbia University agreed last week to pay the Trump administration a US$200-million fine in order to restore access to more than US$1-billion in frozen federal research funding, it was only a matter of time before other elite institutions followed suit. Brown University announced on Wednesday it had also reached an agreement with the Trump administration to make US$50-million in payments to state workforce development programs.
Negotiations with Harvard University are continuing, as is the university’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over cuts to its grants and contracts. Ten other schools, including Johns Hopkins University, New York University, Northwestern University, Cornell University, and the University of California at Berkeley and at Los Angeles, have been singled out for scrutiny by President Donald Trump’s Task Force to Combat Antisemitism.
The Trump administration’s targeting of university research funding is admittedly a brilliant move. The country’s top research-intensive universities – those that make and measure their reputation by the ability of their faculty to produce cutting-edge research across all fields – heavily rely on grants and contracts from the various agencies of the federal government. Without this money, research simply can’t happen.
It’s a funding model that makes sense when both the higher education sector and the government believe in the core mission they share: the advancement of knowledge for the betterment of society. Research universities are vital engines of innovation, but producing high-quality research involves substantial costs in terms of time, equipment and personnel. The most ambitious research projects in science, health and engineering often surpass the financial capabilities of individual institutions.
Tuition fees, especially those charged by private universities, are astronomical, but still would cover a mere fraction of the total cost of conducting original, verifiable, ethical research. Governments invest in universities through research grants and contracts because they, too, seek to support scientific and technological progress, address social challenges, and maintain a competitive edge in the global marketplace.
Trump administration freezes $108-million at Duke amid probe into alleged antisemitism, DEI policies
The Trump administration has demonstrated time and time again that it is interested in neither the advancement of knowledge nor the betterment of society. Or, rather, it is dedicated to promoting certain kinds of knowledge and pursuing vigorous efforts to seize control over the parts of society that are well positioned to challenge its authority.
Hence the barrage of executive orders to reframe American history and to mandate “patriotic” education in K-12 schooling, the attempts to sanction and intimidate law firms, the litigation against CBS and threats to revoke its broadcasting license, and the claims that artificial intelligence models are “woke.” In higher education, the claim that the Trump administration is concerned only with combatting antisemitism on campus is a flimsy excuse for bringing a powerful sector to heel.
The settlements made so far are not identical. Columbia’s agreement specifically denies wrongdoing in its handling of antisemitism allegations but nevertheless agrees to appoint a “resolution monitor” with the ability to scrutinize admissions data, faculty hiring and promotion practices, and processes that ensure students are committed to “free inquiry, open debate, and the fundamental values of equality and respect.”
Brown’s agreement includes several clauses that align with Mr. Trump’s attack on transgender rights, including a ban on the university performing gender-reassignment surgery and prescribing puberty blockers or hormones to minors. Both agreements embedded attempts to protect academic freedom and to retain control over curricular content and hiring practices.
Analysis: Harvard versus Trump is the new battle for independence
But these deals with the Ivy League are just the tip of the iceberg. The Center for American Progress has mapped federal funding cuts to colleges and universities and found that the Trump administration has targeted more than 4,000 grants for termination at more than 600 colleges and universities across the country. While private institutions such as Harvard and Brown have made headlines, public universities and colleges stand to lose significant funding as well.
Every state and every kind of institution – public, private, land-grant, community college – stands to lose, as does the country as a whole. Estimates suggest that funding cuts to the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, which remain in place even as agreements are struck, will lead to between $10- and $16-billion in decreased economic output annually.
These agreements won’t be the end of it. A recent statement from the Manhattan Institute, a conservative thinktank, calls on Mr. Trump to employ more punitive measures, such as revoking accreditation or access to student loans, to coerce compliance with this overtly ideological agenda.
This isn’t a battle over free speech or DEI. It’s an effort to bring research and inquiry under the control of the White House. If universities keep capitulating, they risk losing both their funding and their purpose.