logo
Are Trump's campus funding cuts an attack or a defense of free speech?

Are Trump's campus funding cuts an attack or a defense of free speech?

The Hill13-03-2025
The Trump administration's decision to cut $400 million of federal grants to Columbia University is intended to influence the actions of university administrators. Its goal is to incentivize them to do more to protect Jewish and pro-Israel students from antisemitic harassment.
Will this curtail peaceful and thus legitimate free speech on affected university campuses? The ACLU says it will deter legitimate protests against Israel. Anti-Israel activists go even further — Peter Beinart warns that 'We are witnessing the greatest assault on campus free speech in decades.'
What these critics fail to acknowledge is that there are dangers to free speech on both sides — in inaction as well as overreaction.
The cut-off of financial support is aimed at universities that do not do enough to protect the rights of Jewish and Zionist students to attend classes, wear Jewish-identifying symbols such as Stars of David and yarmulkes and to demonstrate and leaflet in support of Israel without fear of harassment or attack by masked agitators.
There is, of course, always the danger that campus administrators might go too far in protecting Jewish students by limiting peaceful anti-Israel protests. But there is little evidence that the legitimate free speech rights of anti-Israel peaceful protesters are being abridged. The focus is and should be on unlawful conduct that falls outside the protection of free speech, such as blocking access, interfering with classes and intimidating students. Universities should not interfere with peaceful and lawful anti-Israel demonstrations.
Columbia is a private institution, not legally bound by the First Amendment, although it claims to adhere to its spirit. It also claims to apply a single content-neutral standard to all freedom of expression. Pursuant to these principles, it should allow peaceful anti-Israel protesters to say anything about Israel, Zionism and Jews that it would allow anti-Black, anti-gay, anti-transgender and anti-abortion demonstrators to say about those groups and issues.
But of course, no university, private or public, would allow racist or sexist demonstrators to call for the lynching of Blacks, the raping of women or discrimination based on reproductive or identity choices.
The First Amendment does not prohibit private universities from applying a double standard against Jews and Zionists or in favor of groups deemed to be privileged under the affirmative action guidelines of DEI or intersectionality. But the government, in deciding whether to give taxpayer money to private or public institutions, does have the power to withhold funds from schools that apply invidious standards.
No university has the right to receive taxpayer grants. It must show that such grants promote the national interest rather than some partisan ideology. Grants for medical and scientific research promote the national interest. Many other grants do not.
Consider, for example, Barnard's Department of Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, whose website contains an image of a shirt printed with the phrase 'Smash the white supremacis(t) hetero-patriarchy.'
I don't know whether federal money goes directly to this and other 'studies' or 'programs' with comparably ideological and controversial goals, but money is fungible — and therein lies the problem. A $400 million cut from Columbia will affect the entire university, including medical and scientific research. It would be far more effective and selective if funding could be cut back only from programs that do not serve the public interest.
It will not be easy to target with precision the evils that are intended to be addressed by the Trump tactic of cutting funding to universities that do not do enough to protect Jewish and Zionist students. But it is worth trying.
The priority should be to send the message to universities that legitimate, single-standard, peaceful protests against Israel, Zionism or any other nation or ideology must be permitted in the interests of free speech and academic freedom. An equally important priority is to protect the rights of Jewish and Zionist students and faculty to their free speech, safety, security and academic freedom.
Striking the appropriate balance is among the most important roles of universities and government granting agencies. It can be and should be accomplished, despite its challenges.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is the A.I. Sell-off the Start of Something Bigger?
Is the A.I. Sell-off the Start of Something Bigger?

New York Times

time6 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Is the A.I. Sell-off the Start of Something Bigger?

Andrew here. The Trump administration is reportedly considering taking stakes in semiconductor companies — beyond Intel — that were granted money as part of the CHIPS and Science Act, in a major shift toward industrial policy. Cabinet members have said that U.S. taxpayers should have received shares in exchange for funding chipmakers. But there's some important missing context: At the time, companies like TSMC probably wouldn't have taken CHIPS Act money if they had to give up equity. The law was meant to persuade such companies to do something that they believed wasn't economical, namely building factories in the U.S. But the landscape has changed amid President Trump's tariffs, which has made producing chips abroad much more expensive — and made CHIPS Act money more valuable. It appears that the administration's approach has been more stick than carrot. What are the implications? Will U.S. companies take government money in the future? And will this approach get the right results? Tell us what you think. Is the A.I. pendulum swinging again? For years now, investors have clambered to get a piece of the action in artificial intelligence. That's pushed up valuations to nosebleed-inducing levels, even as some market observers (and Sam Altman) warn that things are getting out of hand. For now, private-market investors still appear to be eager to bid up the value of A.I. start-ups. But on Tuesday's market moves suggest that public investors are getting more jittery, raising at least some questions about the future of the tech boom. Things still look bubbly for privately held start-ups — including OpenAI, which is in talks to let current and former employees sell about $6 billion worth of stock at an astonishing roughly $500 billion valuation. That's nearly twice the market capitalization of Salesforce. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Kinzinger: Trump claiming to be war hero ‘just nuts'
Kinzinger: Trump claiming to be war hero ‘just nuts'

The Hill

time7 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Kinzinger: Trump claiming to be war hero ‘just nuts'

Former Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) criticized President Trump for claiming to be a war hero in the wake of the Iran strikes, arguing it is offensive to those who have served in combat. 'Yeah. I mean, look, this is just nuts. This is nuts. And they're going to find — his people are going to find a way to justify this,' Kinzinger, a frequent Trump critic, told CNN's Erin Burnett on Tuesday. 'Listen, when they were putting out something honoring the Army's 250th anniversary, they put out a picture of Donald Trump in his military academy uniform, which has nothing to do with the military except they drill you.' Kinzinger, who retired from Congress in 2021 and is now a senior contributor on CNN, was asked to weigh in on Trump's recent remarks on 'The Mark Levin Show.' 'He's a war hero because we work together. He's a war hero,' Trump told conservative radio host Mark Levin, referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 'I guess I am too.' 'Nobody cares, but I am too. I mean, I sent those planes,' he added, just months after the U.S. bombed three nuclear facilities near Tehran in defense of Israel. Kinzinger, who served in the Air Force and was deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, pressed back against the rhetoric but added that he hopes the president is able to facilitate a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. 'You can like what he's done. That's fine. I hope he gets a resolution in Ukraine,' he said. 'But to put himself on the same level of people that have actually gone out and served this country, not claimed bone spurs, is an offense to anybody who served.' 'And frankly, you just take somebody that served, calling themselves a war hero, even that would be inappropriate,' the former GOP lawmaker, who said recently that he feels closer to a Democrat nowadays, told CNN. 'For a guy that never served to say it, it's nuts.' Kinzinger added, 'But somebody, they'll defend it, they'll find a way.' The comments come as Trump is looking to facilitate a Russia-Ukraine peace deal after meeting with both leaders and seeking another ceasefire in the Middle East between Isreal and Hamas.

Palestinians deserve a state now for the same reasons Jews did in 1948
Palestinians deserve a state now for the same reasons Jews did in 1948

The Hill

time7 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Palestinians deserve a state now for the same reasons Jews did in 1948

Soon, the Palestinian people will be recognized as a sovereign nation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank by most countries. They now have the political and moral momentum toward achieving this goal. The world owes Palestinians independence and sovereignty for the same reasons it granted the Jews living in British Mandatory Palestine their independent state in 1948, only a few years after six million Jews had been gassed to death in German concentration camps. This will happen despite an expected U.S. veto next month in the United Nations, and in spite of the political alliance between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump is pragmatic; he will come to support the creation of a Palestinian state, as most Americans already do. This is because the case for Palestinian independence has been getting clearer and more urgent with every Israeli bombing of mostly innocent Gazans, and with every death from starvation caused by Israel's withholding of food. Most countries now recognize a sovereign Palestinian state. In total, 147 members of the United Nations, or 76 percent of its members, have already recognized the Palestinian state. And of the five members with power to reject Palestinian independence, China and Russia are already known supporters. France and the United Kingdom said they will support sovereign Palestine next month before the U.N. votes on the matter. The lone veto is expected from the U.S., but Trump is likely to change his mind. Ehud Olmert, Israel's Prime Minister from 2006 to 2009, supports an independent Palestinian state. A large segment of Israelis already supports the creation of an independent Palestine, though such support has has declined as the war has progressed. Hundreds of high ranking past members of the Israeli government, the Israeli Parliament, and Israel Defense Forces support Palestinian independence. And for the first time, Israeli human rights organizations such as B'Tselem, and medical associations are calling on the international community to stop the indiscriminate killing of Palestinians by the Israel's Defense Forces. The Arab League of twenty-two Arab nations has called Hamas to disarm and relinquish the Gaza Strip to make peace possible. According to recent Gallup poll, 55 percent of Americans and 41 percent of Republicans support an independent Palestine. And according to The Times of Israel, President Trump recently said that the destruction, killing, and starvation of Palestinians in Gaza were done by Benjamin Netanyahu to keep him in office. This points to a likely U.S. backing of independence. Furthermore, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — a ardent Trump supporter — recently characterized Israel's actions against the Palestinians in the Strip as genocide. Netanyahu himself is partly responsible for the expected creation of an independent Palestinian state because of his increasingly brutal tactics and strategies against the Palestinians. For example, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel's actions have violated the Genocide Convention and issued a warrant for Netanyahu's arrest. Israel had worldwide sympathy and empathy when Hamas invaded its territory and savagely murdered 1,200 Israelis. That action led to a declaration of war against Hamas. But the situation has since changed. The war quickly devolved into a war against all Palestinians in the strip. If the strategy were to get rid of them through indiscriminate killing and mass starvation of innocent people, I am not sure what they would be doing differently. Netanyahu's failure has led much of the world community to believe that that the war in Gaza is no longer a retaliation against Hamas for the atrocities of October 2023, but rather a war to do away with a whole people. The world community in the U.N. will soon reject such behavior and vote to grant independence to Palestine. It is about time for the U.S. to join such cause.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store