University leaders unite to oppose Trump higher education policies
Dozens of university leaders signed a statement opposing the tactics used by President Trump to influence schools, calling for more 'constructive engagement.'
'We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight,' reads the statement, signed by dozens of colleges and universities.
'However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses. We will always seek effective and fair financial practices, but we must reject the coercive use of public research funding,' it added.
The statement was signed by a variety of schools, including Ivy Leagues, state schools, community colleges and technical institutions.
It comes after the Trump administration has taken millions in funding from multiple universities over alleged inaction on antisemitism.
The biggest fight is now with Harvard University, which rejected the Trump administration's demands to change its policies and lost more than $2 billion in federal funding. Harvard sued over the loss in funding on Monday.
'The price of abridging the defining freedoms of American higher education will be paid by our students and our society. On behalf of our current and future students, and all who work at and benefit from our institutions, we call for constructive engagement that improves our institutions and serves our republic,' the statement concluded.
Senate faculties at the Big Ten universities are looking to pass resolutions that urge schools to work together to stand up to the Trump administration.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rangers appoint former Southampton boss Martin as new head coach
Former Southampton boss Russell Martin is the new man in charge at Rangers (Glyn KIRK) Scottish Premiership club Rangers on Thursday confirmed the appointment of former Southampton boss Russell Martin as their new head coach on a three-year deal. The 39-year-old guided Southampton to promotion to the Premier League last year but was sacked in December following one win from their first 16 games. The club were subsequently relegated. Advertisement Rangers finished last season under the caretaker management of former captain Barry Ferguson, having dismissed Philippe Clement in February. Ex-Scotland defender Martin, who had a short loan spell as a player at Rangers in 2018, faces the daunting task of challenging Celtic, who have just won a 13th Scottish title in 14 seasons. "From my time here, I had a taste of how special this club is, the expectation, the passion and the history," he told the club's website. "Now, as I return, I'm determined to bring success back, for the supporters, the players, and everyone inside this club. Advertisement "There's a lot to be done, but the goal is clear -- win matches, win trophies and give Rangers fans a team that they can be proud of." Martin's arrival is the latest in a series of major changes at the club. An American consortium led by Andrew Cavenagh and 49ers Enterprises secured a majority shareholding on Friday, while new sporting director Kevin Thelwell officially began work on Monday. Rangers chief executive Patrick Stewart, who led the recruitment process alongside Thelwell, said: "Our criteria for our next coach were clear: we wanted a coach who will excel in terms of how we want to play, improve our culture, develop our squad, and ultimately win matches. Russell was the standout candidate." jw/lp
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'You Wussed Out': David Mamet Reveals Trump's 20-Minute Call After He Committed A MAGA Sin
Pulitzer Prize-winning screenwriter David Mamet has recalled once receiving a lengthy phone call from Donald Trump after he dared not to go all in on the then-former president's 2020 election conspiracy theories. Trump loyalist Mamet, appearing on Bill Maher's 'Club Random Podcast' this week, remembered being 'kind of iffy' about whether the election had been stolen from Trump during an appearance on Maher's HBO show, 'Real Time.' At 8 a.m. the following day, the Hollywood veteran said he received a call from Trump who told him: 'I saw you on Bill Maher yesterday, you were great. But you wussed out on the question of the stolen election.' Trump then 'talked to me for like 20 minutes about how the election was stolen,' Mamet told Maher. 'But it wasn't,' Maher reminded him. Mamet, a yearslong vocal critic of progressive causes who has called former President Barack Obama a 'tyrant' and described diversity, equity and inclusion efforts as 'garbage,' responded: 'Well, I think it was.' Maher noted how the claim that the election was rigged for now-former President Joe Biden has fallen flat in dozens of court cases, been dismissed by Trump's own commissioners and analysts have described the 2020 vote as 'the most fair, honest election we've ever had.' Mamet argued Trump would have won by a majority had various issues not been suppressed. 'Oh, please. That's so ridiculous,' said Maher, who doubted they would have swung the result. Watch from the 5:30 point here: Critics Cackle Over Mike Johnson's Awkward Confession About Elon Musk Phone Call Cringe Karoline Leavitt Clip Perfectly Sums Up Trump's White House, Say Critics Critics Gasp At Trump Official's 'The Thing That Matters' Declaration
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: Outrage over Trump's electric vehicle policies is misplaced
Electric car subsidies are heading for the chopping block. A tax bill recently passed by House Republicans is set to stop billions in taxpayer cash from being spent on electric vehicle purchases. If embraced by the Senate and signed into law by President Donald Trump, the bill would gut long-standing government handouts for going electric. The move comes on the heels of another climate policy embraced by Republicans. Earlier this year, Trump announced plans to roll back burdensome rules that effectively force American consumers to buy electric, rather than gas-fueled, cars. The Environmental Protection Agency has called that move the 'biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history.' Not everyone sees it that way. Jason Rylander, legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute, assailed Trump's efforts, noting that his 'administration's ignorance is trumped only by its malice toward the planet.' Other similarly aligned groups have voiced similar sentiments arguing that ending these rules would 'cost consumers more, because clean energy and cleaner cars are cheaper than sticking with the fossil fuels status quo.' Backtracking on EV purchasing mandates seems to have hit Trump haters particularly hard. That mandate — established by President Joe Biden — would have pushed U.S. automakers to sell more EVs. Millions more. Electric cars currently account for 8% of new auto sales. Biden ordered— by presidential fiat — that figure to climb to 35% by 2032. If you believe the hype, the result would be an electric nirvana, one defined by cleaner air and rampant job creation. I'm not convinced. For one thing, cleaner air courtesy of electrification requires that EVs replace gas-powered autos. They're not. In fact, study after study suggests that the purchase of EVs adds to the number of cars in a household. And two-thirds of households with an EV have another non-EV that is driven more — hardly a recipe for climate success given that EVs must be driven (a lot) to deliver climate benefits. Fewer miles driven in an EV also challenges the economic efficiency of the billions Washington spends annually to subsidize their purchase. Claims of job creation thanks to EVs are even more questionable. These claims are predicated around notions of aggressive consumer demand that drives increased EV manufacturing. This in turn creates jobs. A recent Princeton University study noted, 'Announced manufacturing capacity additions and expansions would nearly double U.S. capacity to produce electric vehicles by 2030 and are well sized to meet expected demand for made-in-USA vehicles.' Jobs would be created if there were demand for EVs. Except that's not what's happening. Rather, consumer interest in EVs has effectively cratered. In 2024, 1.3 million EVs were sold in the United States, up from 1.2 million in 2023. This paltry increase is even more worrying given drastic price cuts seen in the EV market in 2024. Tesla knocked thousands of dollars off its best-selling Model 3 and Model Y. Ford followed suit by cutting prices on its Mach-e. So did Volkswagen and Hyundai. Despite deep discounts, consumer interest in electrification remains — to put it mildly — tepid at best. So, when people equate electrification with robust job creation, I'm left wondering what they are going on about. Even if jobs were created, EV advocates are coy about how many of those jobs would benefit existing autoworkers. Would all these workers — currently spread across large swaths of the Midwest — be guaranteed jobs on an EV assembly line? If not, how many workers should expect to receive pink slips? For those who do, will they be able to find new jobs that pay as much as their old ones? Touting job creation for political expediency is one thing. Fully recognizing its impact on hardworking American families today, another. Some Americans may decry Trump's actions on climate, but they have only themselves to blame. Many of the pro-climate policies enacted, particularly during the Biden era, deliver little in the way of climate benefits (or any benefit for that matter) while making a mockery of the real economic concerns businesses and consumers have about climate action. No more. In justifying climate rollbacks, the president says many of his predecessor's policies have hurt rather than helped the American people. He's right and should be commended for doing something about it. ____ Ashley Nunes is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School. ___
