Trump Attacks Academic Freedom at Esteemed Universities

By now, you’ve likely heard of the ongoing war against higher education by the Trump Administration. They’ve halted funding and attacked anything that they can label “DEI” or “liberal.” Harvard University is one of the few Ivy institutions that has held its ground by pushing back while others, like Columbia and Brown universities, have struck deals with the Trump Administration that involve them agreeing to make sweeping changes regarding gender, gender identity, and admissions, in addition to paying restitution to the Trump Administration in order to receive federal funding that had already been allocated by Congress.

In each of these cases, the rationale for opening an investigation into the school involved claims of antisemitism due to pro-Palestinian protests on the university campuses in 2023; however, as mentioned above, the agreements with the Trump administration by both Columbia and Brown seem to focus more on gender identity and eliminating anything remotely related to “DEI” thereby affecting admissions, student and faculty supports, hiring, scholarships, and administration. The agreements seem to offer little in the way of combatting antisemitism.

These attacks also have managed to pit leaders and ruling bodies of college administration against each other, as colleges typically have complicated leadership structures. Typically, leadership will include executives (e.g., president, provost, and deans); a board; and various deans, administrators, or officers in addition to many other powerful stakeholder groups. For public universities the governing authority (a.k.a., board) is appointed by the governor. Each of the attacks on these universities involved targeted efforts to force out university presidents for their support of diversity and equity initiatives. 

Virginia’s esteemed universities have not avoided the onslaught of Trump interference; however, there was significant behind-the-scenes efforts by both the Trump and Youngkin administrations to unduly influence hiring, admissions, and student and faculty supports at two of the top public universities in Virginia: George Mason University (GMU) and the University of Virginia (UVA). Thus, it should not be considered a coincidence that the Trump investigations occurred simultaneously with conflict over university board appointments at both universities. Specifically, UVA and GMU board appointees by Governor Youngkin which were rejected by the Virginia General Assembly. At GMU the vacant seats prevented a quorum for the board, so the board could not conduct business.

Conspiracies and Complicity at UVA

UVA is ranked in the top five public universities and about 25th overall in the nation. It has a long and storied history, since its founding in 1819 by Thomas Jefferson. It has notable graduates and incredible athletic wins. Students in and outside of Virginia strive to attend The University.

Unless one is a UVA Wahoo, one may have missed the crazy happenings at UVA over the summer. In June, UVA’s community newspaper, The Cavalier Daily, offered an early look into how Trump Administration investigations by the departments of Justice (DOJ) and Education (ED) led to the resignation of beloved UVA President Jim Ryan. Ryan, concerned that remaining in his job would threaten university funding and student financial aid, made the difficult decision to resign:

I am inclined to fight for what I believe in, and I believe deeply in this University. But I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job. - UVA President Jim Ryan

In November, shortly after Abigail Spanberger’s gubernatorial win, a conflict between her and current Governor Glenn Youngkin reignited this story when Youngkin sharply accused Spanberger, a UVA alum, of “overreach” and “hyperbole” in his hyperbolic letter in response to her request for a delay in the UVA search for a new president. This opened up a laundromat of dirty laundry about what really happened leading up to Ryan’s resignation. Again, The Cavalier Daily provided a blow-by-blow account, including President Ryan’s action-packed 12-page letter (a must read!), as it exposes the actions of 1) Youngkin who drafted a DEI resolution for UVA’s board and then “crowed” that “DEI is dead” on Fox News; 2) former Board member (appointed by Youngkin in 2023) and current UVA Rector Rachel Sheridan who may have used undue influence on his resignation; and 3) that his resignation was part of a “supposed deal with the Trump Administration.”

Earlier this year, the Virginia General Assembly rejected several Youngkin appointees to UVA and GMU, including former former Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, who Senate Privileges and Elections Committee Chair Aaron Rouse (D-Virginia Beach) referred to as ““MAGA extremists” and “Project 2025 supporters,” who are opposed to Democrats’ progressive ideals.”” 

Nevertheless, several universities continued to recognize these appointees as board members; therefore, on June 9, 2025, Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax) sent a letter to remind all of the public universities that “state code requires all governing body members to be confirmed by the General Assembly.” Since then, Youngkin and Democratic legislators have been locked in a series of legal disputes that made it all the way to the Virginia Supreme Court, which denied Attorney General Jason Miyares’ appeal on behalf of Youngkin on November 17, 2025. On December 9, 2025, Senate Democrats won an injunction against the university boards of UVA and GMU recognizing Youngkin’s appointees that had not been confirmed by the General Assembly which offers Governor-Elect Spanberger the opportunity to seat new appointees in 2026.

Considering this protracted legal battle and the influence of the Board on UVA’s decisions vis-a-vis the Trump Administration’s attacks on UVA and President Ryan. In fact, Ryan has asserted that three of Younkin’s appointed UVA board members were the real force behind his resignation, instead of the DOJ. 

Photo: Vanessa Hall

Investigations and Interference at GMU

GMU is ranked in the top 60 public universities in the nation and number one among regional universities. It began as a branch campus of UVA in the 1950s, and became its own university in 1972. Locals have seen its transformation from a local commuter campus in the 1980s, to the research, academic, and arts powerhouse it is today. 

Trump’s departments of Justice (DOJ) and Education (ED) opened at least five investigations into GMU’s admissions and scholarship practices, antisemitism, and hiring and promotion of staff. The first federal investigation involved antisemitic discrimination on campus. Both the GMU president and Jewish faculty responded that the GMU community was safe and inclusive. The Jewish faculty letter was particularly pointed, describing the investigations as “quickly intensifying under a false, racially divisive, and deeply cynical claim of combating anti-Semitism”.

These investigations came fast and furious from January to August with tight deadlines, including an August 22, 2025 ED finding and list of demands that gave GMU only 10 days response time. This list of demands included a “personal apology from GMU’s President to the University community for promoting unlawful discriminatory practices in hiring, promotion, and tenure processes” and demanded that GMU change its website.

At one point, the GMU governing board sought to negotiate with the Trump Administration to resolve the supposed issues; however, the GMU faculty senate spoke up early and often to reject the federal efforts to stifle academic freedom. GMU faculty recognized early on that GMU President Gregory Washington was a likely target of the federal investigation and they fiercely advocated for his position and positive record at the university. At the same time Washington protected his university faculty and students, at one point referring to the ED investigation findings as “legal fiction.”

It is entirely possible that GMU had the benefit of observing the federal attacks on UVA in real time, which enabled them to gather forces to reject federal overreach and efforts to suppress free speech and academic freedom on campus. In fact, a faculty member emphasized this point to NPR, “What’s going on at Mason is really following on the heels of what happened at the University of Virginia and the ouster of President Ryan and we are seeing a similar play.”

Photo: Vanessa Hall

Overreach and Opportunism by the Administration

In each of these cases, the Trump Administration used antisemitism as a weapon to target the universities after pro-Palestinian campus protests. The Trump Administration’s ED targeted 60 universities in this manner. Unfortunately, some universities, like Brown and Columbia, have caved on the very DEI policies that have made those universities appealing to faculty, students, and families while others have taken a firm stance against the government.

Unfortunately, it appears that in each instance, antisemitism was a red herring, as the real targets of the Trump Administration have repeatedly been revealed to be diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and practices; antiracism; and accessibility. The Administration has done this by effectively redefining its anti-discrimination laws to, as Representative Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat and the ranking member on the House’s education committee, stated:

Under this Administration, the government’s Office of Civil Rights has adopted a radical reinterpretation of our civil rights laws to attack diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility…. The Trump Administration’s selective actions undermine the pursuit of justice, and the independence and academic freedom of America’s institutions of higher education. - Representative Bobby Scott (VA-D)

Additionally, a GMU alum stated that “Using Jewish identity as a cover for political attempts to restructure an institution is not true support, it’s instrumentalization, and ultimately, it does more harm than good.”

It has been clear from the beginning, that the Trump administration was attacking academic freedom at the university level. GMU has gotten to the heart of this debate:

This is a debate about who governs our universities and colleges, who belongs here, whose speech counts and whose speech is silenced, and who and what we serve.