The swift initial rollout of an order seeking more control over Trump administration universities has defended the schools. Most higher education leaders responded silently in February, fearing retaliation from a president known to retaliate against their enemies.
But weeks after billions of people freeze on federal funding, demanding policy changes and investigating, a wide coalition of university leaders who publicly oppose those moves has taken root. The most visible evidence is a statement signed last week by more than 400 campus leaders, opposed what they saw as an attack on the administration's academia.
While universities and administrator organizations regularly meet on a wide range of issues, the American Association of Universities Statement was a rare show of unity, taking into account a broad cross-section of interest, including Ivy League institutions and community colleges, public flagship schools, Jesuit universities, community schools, and historically black universities.
“We speak in one voice that we are putting higher education in America at risk against unprecedented government overreach and political interference,” the statement said.
Although no concrete actions were included, the next one was unclear, the collective stance reflected a more zincified group than ever before.
“It's not just what the elite thinks when they're teaming up with the ED all over,” said Richard K. Lyons, the prime minister of the University of California, Berkeley, in an interview after the school signed. “On one level, I think it's very encouraging to see a really different, wide-angle, great group of groups from the universities and universities that signed the message.”
Another signator, Brian Sandoval, president of the University of Nevada, Reno, and former Republican governor, said he had not seen the statement through a political lens. “I'm worried about what we saw and what we're going through,” he said.
A joint statement from university leaders, energised by the conflict with the Harvard Trump administration, has emerged even after the Higher Education Association and a handful of universities filed lawsuits fighting cuts in funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Energy Division. And the university president was engaged in discussions in Washington, discussing and meeting each other more frequently than they had since the Covid-19 pandemic.
The American Colleges Association, the exclusive trade group that counts the country's most powerful schools of 71 members, will meet this week at its first meeting since President Trump's inauguration. The conference is not open to the public, but could end as a strategic session on how to deal with administration moves, including anti-Semitism on campus, diversity programs, and investigations of admissions practices and attempts to control what is being taught in the classroom.
These actions stem from the administration's desire to punish them, and say they gave students a liberal perspective, which was inadequately anti-Semitistic and indoctrinated.
The boards of major education groups speak more frequently.
“There are no emails to leave,” said Sandoval, a member of the board of directors of the Association of Public and Land Nutrition Colleges. “There's a lot of communication.”
One private university president said Wednesday that he and other university leaders were doing much more than before after discussing the strategy on condition of anonymity.
When asked whether additional lawsuits would be filed against the Trump administration, it was expected to pass the 100th day next week, with several university presidents contacted by the New York Times either refusing to make predictions or mentioning secret, incidental plans.
The group's statement grew from debate among the president and other academic leaders, and said urgent concerns that many leaders have not spoken to the White House would lead the group that wrote the statement.
“We decided to see if we had the will to act collectively,” she said.
Dr. Pasqueraela, former president of Mount Holyoke College, added that many leaders are putting pressure on them to say something from campus.
The organization convened two virtual listening sessions in which leaders from 193 universities and university leaders participated in order to assess the group's interests.
The agreed statement was not radical and focused on opposing “the excessive invasion of government in the lives of people who learn, live and work on our campus,” but it was important in that it represents an unusually wide consensus among different members.
Initially, the statement only had 100 signatures. Support has grown as university leaders sensed the strength of the numbers, Dr. Pasquera said, adding that one university president signed and asked to be removed after receiving a pushback.
Most of the signatories are from Blue State, but some signatories represent Red State, including Millsups University in Jackson, Michigan, Southern University in Suwanney, Tennessee, and Talladega University in Alabama.
Many other Red State presidents have not participated in this effort.
“I had no advantage at all – I saw nothing,” said the leader of a Republican-led state private university.
An official who is skeptical that one additional signature would prove decisive, added: “I don't think the petition will change the minds of the President, his administration, or anyone in Congress.”
And the officials felt a potential flaw: to offend the White House.
That fear is realistic for many schools, said Michael S. Ross, president of Wesleyan University. He is a voice critic of the administration's actions affecting the university, and recently took part in a “hands-off” protest near the school's campus in Middletown, Connecticut. He said he was not surprised that some universities declined the opportunity to sign.
“This administration is ready to fully retaliate against its enemy,” Dr. Ross said. “I asked a lot of people to sign, and many people said, 'I can't sign. I'm afraid.' ”
