Latest news with #ChristopherRufo
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Here's who is pushing Trump to upend higher ed — and what they want
A new statement from a conservative think tank is shedding light on what critics of higher education want from the Trump administration — and who some of them are. The push comes as President Donald Trump launches a series of attacks against colleges and universities, including at Harvard University, where $2.6 billion in federal funding has been pulled, and two lawsuits are in court. A potential deal between the federal government and Harvard is said to be in the works. Read more: Trump used her story to attack Harvard. She says 'don't destroy the university in my name' Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow at the right-wing New York City think tank the Manhattan Institute, organized the statement, and it was signed by dozens of educators, politicians and activists. The Trump administration has appeared to follow the direction of Rufo as he has called for the dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion departments and the U.S. Department of Education and adjusting or cutting federal funding to institutions in an effort to change their ways. Rufo has said higher education should be the first field of battle. He notably led a campaign in 2024 against Claudine Gay, the former president at Harvard and its first Black president. After facing accusations of plagiarism from Rufo and following her congressional hearing on antisemitism, she later resigned. 'I've been working on these issues for five years. At the beginning, it felt like I was the only one fighting. And now, fast-forward five years, some of the ideas that I had cobbled together suddenly become reality. They become policy. They affect billions of dollars in the flow of funds. And so that's a great feeling. I think as an activist, there's really nothing better than seeing the ideas that you fought for, against the odds, triumph and become reality,' Rufo told the New York Times. The Manhattan Institute statement lays out a new contract for universities and colleges and calls for the Trump administration to adopt it. If institutions don't accept the contract, that should result in the revocation of all public benefits, the statement suggests. Despite support from some educators, Jon Fansmith of the American Council on Education said he believes the implementation of the policy could be devastating and would be illegal. The contract is similar to what the Trump administration sent to Harvard in April, which demanded an overhaul of Harvard's leadership structure, admissions and hiring. If it didn't comply, the federal government warned the school that it could risk losing $9 billion in funding. Linda McMahon, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education, described the Manhattan Institute's statement and contract as a 'compelling roadmap to restore integrity and rigor to the American academy' in an X post. Rufo told Bloomberg that he is optimistic about the plan becoming policy in the next several months. Among those who signed onto the statement are Omar Sultan Haque, who works at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., who was the former House Education and Workforce Committee Chairperson. In that role, Foxx led the charge against Harvard University as she issued subpoenas in 2024, saying they'd failed to produce 'priority documents' related to an ongoing investigation into campus antisemitism. What is in the contract? In the statement, Rufo and the signees state that American higher education has 'long been the bright lights of our civilization' but that for the past 50 years, universities and colleges have 'discarded their founding principles and burned down their accumulated prestige, all in pursuit of ideologies that corrupt knowledge and point the nation toward nihilism.' This has occurred in waves through protests during the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020 and the 'celebration of the Hamas terror campaign' — referring to October 7, 2023, and the war in Gaza, according to the statement. As a result, institutions have capitulated to the 'radical left,' turning them into places with narrow political agendas, the signees state. In order for this to be fixed, a new contract with universities must be made. The signees said universities, as part of the contract, should: control for academic fraud and merit-based decision-making cease direct participation in social and political activism adhere to colorblind equality in hiring, admissions, promotions and contracting and abolish DEI programs allow for freedom of speech and public dissent implement standards for civil discourse where students are suspended or expelled for disrupting speakers, vandalizing property, occupying buildings, calling for violence or interrupting the operations of the university publish data on race, admissions and class rank; employment and financial returns by major; and campus attitudes on ideology, free speech, and civil discourse 'Although some academics will balk at any kind of intervention, the reality is that American taxpayers subsidize the universities to the tune of more than $150 billion per year. In exchange, those institutions have a responsibility to follow the law and to uphold basic academic standards, beginning with the most important of all: an orientation toward truth,' Rufo wrote in an op-ed. Read more: Trump admin brings Harvard antisemitism case to Justice Dept. after 'fruitless' discussions The principles set out in the statement are 'good for universities, conducive to the public good, and consistent with existing law,' according to Rufo. 'The intention is to set a baseline of minimum standards that will rein in the worst instincts of the universities, empower administrators who want to prioritize academic excellence, and ensure that taxpayer funding is devoted to the pursuit of knowledge, rather than ideological crusades,' Rufo said. Why sign on? Higher education has been criticized for decades, but the core values of liberal education have been 'badly damaged' over the past 10 years in particular, according to Peter Wood, the president of the National Association of Scholars, who signed onto the Manhattan Institute statement. The association is a membership group of about 3,500 mostly academics whose mission is to promote liberal arts education with a focus on the pursuit of truth, academic freedom and the cultivation of virtuous citizenship. 'It's been my long-term goal — that and also the goal of the National Association of Scholars — to try to win the attention of political leaders to the problem that higher education has betrayed its fundamental commitment to intellectual freedom and pursuit of truth and the upholding of important standards. For the most part, that complaint has gone unheeded,' Wood told MassLive. 'I think when Donald Trump was elected to his second term, he got the message that higher education, and not just higher education, but K-12 education as well, have been corrupted, and that it is a pretty strong imperative that he do something about it,' he said. Read more: Harvard hands over employee ID verification info after Trump subpoena In higher education, Wood takes issue with the implementation of diversity, equity and inclusion as a means of lowering academic standards, not teaching certain topics in classrooms and said movements like Black Lives Matter intimidate large groups of people into thinking society is inherently racist, he said. These topics are widely debated. To some, including Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, DEI is seen as a means of providing equal opportunities to all students and eliminating stigmatization. Wood believes higher education, as it stands, attempts to 'commandeer higher education into a path of indoctrinating young people into a false set of beliefs about the country and our broader civilization,' he said. As a result, there is a cohort of young people who, as they grow up, become committed supporters and voters for politicians who share their contempt for America, Wood said. While Wood said some of Trump's actions toward higher education have been 'heavy-handed,' he also finds it difficult to see alternatives for creating reform. 'I don't think that there is a single body of people who, in some organized fashion, have the ear of President Trump, or if there is, I don't know what it would be. But there are many of us who are bidding for his attention and hoping that he takes the sorts of actions that he has been taking,' Wood said. Wood said the Manhattan Institute, which is larger and wealthier than his association, has more avenues to the Trump administration. Sultan Haque, who works at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, referred MassLive to a Substack article he wrote about his criticisms of higher education and the need for the Manhattan statement. In it, Sultan Haque argues that universities and colleges need reform but can only do so through external pressure. 'Self-aware and mature leaders would see the crisis for what it is, accept the need for external accountability, engage in negotiation, and find common ground reforms from any source, loved or despised, that makes progress more likely,' he said. Read more: 4 rich Mass. colleges dodged a big Trump tax, and may have an unlikely ally to thank He describes academia as an 'ideological monoculture' with substantially more liberal Harvard faculty than conservatives and ultimately a place that rewards and protects the status quo. 'Many of the reforms being demanded from the outside now are things elite universities themselves admit they should have implemented decades ago, but never got around to, and were actively resisted until external pressure and shame arrived,' Sultan Haque said. Pushback on the statement Jon Fansmith, of the American Council on Education, said he takes Rufo at his word that he speaks to the Trump administration regularly — and acknowledges the potential sway he has on federal officials. At the same time, he believes Trump is going after higher education not because of Rufo but because it is the topic that Trump's voter base takes issue with. It's 'one of these culture war issues' where Trump needed something to draw lines of distinction between what left-leaning people believe and what conservatives think — and higher education has only become more hotly debated as the price tag to attend increases, Fansmith said. Trump's actions aren't intended to do what is best for higher education but instead are part of an all-out battle to defeat the current higher education system, Fansmith said. At the end of the day, the Manhattan Institute's statement isn't anything surprising or new to Fansmith — they are similar criticisms he has heard over the years. Read more: State Department announces investigation into Harvard international visas While he agrees with the statement in some ways, such as civil debate and a diversity of opinions on campuses as important, he believes that those practices are already happening on college campuses. If the Trump administration implements the policy as laid out by the Manhattan Institute's statement, Fansmith said it would be 'bad for democracy' and 'deeply concerning.' He said it would likely wind up in court, as it is 'illegal,' he said. The attempt at implementing such a policy feels contradictory to Fansmith, who said the signees might be up in arms if left-leaning politicians adopted a widespread federal policy that forced institutions to do what they wanted. 'It's a very short-sighted view,' Fansmith said. More Higher Ed Trump admin brings Harvard antisemitism case to Justice Dept. after 'fruitless' discussions Trump used her story to attack Harvard. She says 'don't destroy the university in my name' Harvard hands over employee ID verification info after Trump subpoena Harvard is open to paying $500 million to settle with Trump admin, NYT reports Here's every mention of Harvard in the lyrics of Tom Lehrer Read the original article on MassLive.
Mint
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Harvard Nemesis Wants Trump's College Crusade to Reach Every Campus
Christopher Rufo, the conservative activist who has been influential in the White House's efforts to reshape higher education, now wants to expand the campaign well beyond the elite schools that have borne the brunt of the pressure. Rufo says the Education Department is considering a proposal that would ensure all US universities that receive federal funding — the vast majority — adopt many of the same conditions that Columbia University agreed to in a deal this week. He sees the plan, which he first outlined with the Manhattan Institute this month, as a way to swiftly broaden President Donald Trump's higher-education agenda. 'I know for a fact that it circulated through the White House and through the Department of Education,' Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, said in an interview in Gig Harbor, Washington, where he lives and works. The Trump administration has used federal funding as leverage to press schools to align with its priorities, from battling campus antisemitism to reassessing diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. This week, the White House finalized a $221 million agreement with Columbia that imposes new conditions tied to these issues, the first such deal with an Ivy League school. Harvard, a primary target, is fighting the administration's efforts in court even as it negotiates a possible settlement. Talks are underway with Cornell University, Northwestern and Brown to reinstate previously frozen funds, while institutions such as Duke and Johns Hopkins are facing mounting pressure as grant suspensions threaten to disrupt research programs and international student pipelines. Under Rufo's proposal, schools would be subject to demands including purging their institutions of diversity initiatives or other programs focused on specific minority groups; harsh and swift disciplinary measures for student protesters; the publicization of demographic data in admissions decisions; and hiring conservative faculty. The terms would be baked into universities' contracts with federal agencies for research funding — and, if taken a step further, could be incorporated into the powerful accreditation system that determines colleges' eligibility to receive federal financial aid. 'Columbia has its unique issues, Harvard has its own unique issues. But after you go through the list of the next six or seven universities, there has to be a point where there's a general, blanket policy,' said Rufo, 40. 'The particular negotiations, in that sense, are just the opening bid.' Secretary of Education Linda McMahon appeared to endorse the proposal last week when she congratulated Rufo in a post on X and called the plan 'a compelling roadmap to restore integrity and rigor to the American academy.' When reached for comment, an Education Department spokesperson referred Bloomberg to McMahon's post and said there was no mention of implementation plans. But Rufo said he is optimistic that the statement will turn into policy sometime in the next few months. 'This set of principles is a fairly reasonable compromise,' Rufo said. 'I think the president should just impose it as a condition.' The efforts are already spreading piecemeal to an increasingly broad swath of higher education. On Wednesday, the Education Department announced civil rights investigations into scholarship programs at five colleges, including the University of Michigan, the University of Miami and the University of Nebraska Omaha. A series of federal investigations at George Mason University, a regional public college in Virginia, seem aimed at forcing out president Gregory Washington over his past support for DEI initiatives — a move that successfully led to University of Virginia president Jim Ryan's resignation last month. But while they've been indirectly affected by the chaos, most of the country's patchwork of 4,000 colleges and universities have escaped direct federal threats. Robert Kelchen, a professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, said the administration is clearly laying the groundwork for a more wide-ranging attack on higher education. 'I think they're trying to move in that direction, especially on things like DEI,' he said. 'It's clear the administration is using every lever they can think of.' Rufo isn't a White House adviser or a federal employee, but he has strong influence among conservative education reformers, including many currently working for the Trump administration. He rose to prominence crusading against DEI programs and played an instrumental role in Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' education agenda in 2023. His profile rose higher still after he spearheaded a public campaign to oust former Harvard president Claudine Gay over plagiarism allegations — one of the initial seismic reverberations of the campaign to change higher education. One of Rufo's main proposals is tied to accreditors, historically powerful but until recently largely uncontroversial entities that focus on ensuring educational quality and financial health. They also are responsible for determining if institutions are eligible for federal student aid. Rufo said the White House should 'turn the screws' on accreditors and then use them as a proxy for reform. 'We want to say that every accreditor needs to have these minimum principles and enforce them at universities,' he said. Trump has called accreditation his 'secret weapon,' and in April he issued an executive order calling for reform. He threatened to strip federal recognition from accreditors 'engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of federal law.' For Rufo, the stakes of that order are clear: Accreditors must enforce the conservative view of antidiscrimination law, including by ensuring colleges aren't engaging in DEI initiatives. Almost every accreditor has already eliminated language in their standards around diversity and inclusion, but Rufo said they should go a step further and adopt some version of the standards laid out in his proposal. 'The goal is to extend all of this basically to federal financial aid,' Kelchen said. 'The administration so far has not gone after that, maybe because it could be seen as political overreach. But they can work through the accreditors to do that.' If that happens, Rufo said it would 'shift the whole university sector on a new course.' 'That's my goal: To change the culture of the institutions as a whole,' he said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Miami Herald
27-07-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Harvard nemesis wants Trump's college crusade to reach every campus
Christopher Rufo, the conservative activist who has been influential in the White House's efforts to reshape higher education, now wants to expand the campaign well beyond the elite schools that have borne the brunt of the pressure. Rufo says the Education Department is considering a proposal that would ensure all U.S. universities that receive federal funding - the vast majority - adopt many of the same conditions that Columbia University agreed to in a deal this week. He sees the plan, which he first outlined with the Manhattan Institute this month, as a way to swiftly broaden President Donald Trump's higher-education agenda. 'I know for a fact that it circulated through the White House and through the Department of Education,' Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, said in an interview in Gig Harbor, Washington, where he lives and works. The Trump administration has used federal funding as leverage to press schools to align with its priorities, from battling campus antisemitism to reassessing diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. This week, the White House finalized a $221 million agreement with Columbia that imposes new conditions tied to these issues, the first such deal with an Ivy League school. Harvard, a primary target, is fighting the administration's efforts in court even as it negotiates a possible settlement. Talks are underway with Cornell University, Northwestern and Brown to reinstate previously frozen funds, while institutions such as Duke and Johns Hopkins are facing mounting pressure as grant suspensions threaten to disrupt research programs and international student pipelines. Under Rufo's proposal, schools would be subject to demands including purging their institutions of diversity initiatives or other programs focused on specific minority groups; harsh and swift disciplinary measures for student protesters; the publicization of demographic data in admissions decisions; and hiring conservative faculty. The terms would be baked into universities' contracts with federal agencies for research funding - and, if taken a step further, could be incorporated into the powerful accreditation system that determines colleges' eligibility to receive federal financial aid. 'Columbia has its unique issues, Harvard has its own unique issues. But after you go through the list of the next six or seven universities, there has to be a point where there's a general, blanket policy,' said Rufo, 40. 'The particular negotiations, in that sense, are just the opening bid.' Secretary of Education Linda McMahon appeared to endorse the proposal last week when she congratulated Rufo in a post on X and called the plan 'a compelling roadmap to restore integrity and rigor to the American academy.' When reached for comment, an Education Department spokesperson referred Bloomberg to McMahon's post and said there was no mention of implementation plans. But Rufo said he is optimistic that the statement will turn into policy sometime in the next few months. 'This set of principles is a fairly reasonable compromise,' Rufo said. 'I think the president should just impose it as a condition.' The efforts are already spreading piecemeal to an increasingly broad swath of higher education. On Wednesday, the Education Department announced civil rights investigations into scholarship programs at five colleges, including the University of Michigan, the University of Miami and the University of Nebraska Omaha. A series of federal investigations at George Mason University, a regional public college in Virginia, seem aimed at forcing out president Gregory Washington over his past support for DEI initiatives - a move that successfully led to University of Virginia president Jim Ryan's resignation last month. But while they've been indirectly affected by the chaos, most of the country's patchwork of 4,000 colleges and universities have escaped direct federal threats. Robert Kelchen, a professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, said the administration is clearly laying the groundwork for a more wide-ranging attack on higher education. 'I think they're trying to move in that direction, especially on things like DEI,' he said. 'It's clear the administration is using every lever they can think of.' Rufo isn't a White House adviser or a federal employee, but he has strong influence among conservative education reformers, including many currently working for the Trump administration. He rose to prominence crusading against DEI programs and played an instrumental role in Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' education agenda in 2023. His profile rose higher still after he spearheaded a public campaign to oust former Harvard president Claudine Gay over plagiarism allegations - one of the initial seismic reverberations of the campaign to change higher education. One of Rufo's main proposals is tied to accreditors, historically powerful but until recently largely uncontroversial entities that focus on ensuring educational quality and financial health. They also are responsible for determining if institutions are eligible for federal student aid. Rufo said the White House should 'turn the screws' on accreditors and then use them as a proxy for reform. 'We want to say that every accreditor needs to have these minimum principles and enforce them at universities,' he said. Trump has called accreditation his 'secret weapon,' and in April he issued an executive order calling for reform. He threatened to strip federal recognition from accreditors 'engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of federal law.' For Rufo, the stakes of that order are clear: Accreditors must enforce the conservative view of antidiscrimination law, including by ensuring colleges aren't engaging in DEI initiatives. Almost every accreditor has already eliminated language in their standards around diversity and inclusion, but Rufo said they should go a step further and adopt some version of the standards laid out in his proposal. 'The goal is to extend all of this basically to federal financial aid,' Kelchen said. 'The administration so far has not gone after that, maybe because it could be seen as political overreach. But they can work through the accreditors to do that.' If that happens, Rufo said it would 'shift the whole university sector on a new course.' 'That's my goal: To change the culture of the institutions as a whole,' he said. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Bloomberg
26-07-2025
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Harvard Nemesis Wants Trump's College Crusade to Reach Every Campus
Christopher Rufo, the conservative activist who has been influential in the White House's efforts to reshape higher education, now wants to expand the campaign well beyond the elite schools that have borne the brunt of the pressure. Rufo says the Education Department is considering a proposal that would ensure all US universities that receive federal funding — the vast majority — adopt many of the same conditions that Columbia University agreed to in a deal this week. He sees the plan, which he first outlined with the Manhattan Institute this month, as a way to swiftly broaden President Donald Trump's higher-education agenda.
Yahoo
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NY Times rushed out story on Mamdani claiming to be black on Columbia application over fears it would be scooped by Christopher Rufo: report
The New York Times rushed to put out its story on Zohran Mamdani claiming to be 'African American' when he applied to Columbia University because the newspaper feared it would be scooped by right-leaning journalist Christopher Rufo, according to a report. The Gray Lady is facing a storm of criticism following its decision to publish the story based on hacked Columbia documents that revealed Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, identified as both 'Asian' and 'Black or African American' on his 2009 college application. Mamdani, who is of Indian descent and was born in Uganda, confirmed the details to the Times and said he checked those boxes because the application did not reflect the complexity of his background. Two people familiar with the reporting process told Semafor that the Times knew Rufo and other reporters were working on the same lead. Rufo confirmed to Semafor that he had been pursuing the story and planned to release more details on his Substack. A Times spokesperson denied that Rufo's reporting prompted the timing of the publication. 'We publish stories once newsworthy information is confirmed and our reporters and editors have completed their work,' a Times spokesperson told The Post. 'That was the case with this story; we went to Mr. Mamdani, he confirmed our information as true, and our colleagues had done thorough reporting. We don't hit publish because others may be working on a story.' Times editors also sought to push back on the public criticism. 'What matters most here is whether the information was true and factual — it was, confirmed by Mr. Mamdani; that it was independently confirmed; and that it is relevant to the public,' Patrick Healy, assistant managing editor for standards and trust at the Times, told CJR. Mayor Eric Adams, who is running against Mamdani as an independent, publicly called on Columbia to release Mamdani's admission records, calling his racial identification 'deeply offensive.' Aides to former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who lost to Mamdani in the Democratic primary, said Mamdani's claims on the form could be 'the tip of the iceberg' and that the state assemblyman could be hiding even more 'fraud.' The Times piece drew criticism over the weekend, sparking heated debate among Mamdani's supporters, media observers and even Gray Lady journalists. Some critics defended Mamdani's racial identification, pointing out that he was born in Africa. Others questioned the ethics of reporting on a college application that was ultimately rejected, and whether hacked materials from a teenager's personal file merited a full news article. A large share of the criticism focused on the source of the documents — an online figure known for using the pseudonym Crémieux. Initially described by the Times as 'an academic and an opponent of affirmative action,' Crémieux has previously promoted controversial views on the link between race and IQ. According to the Guardian, Crémieux is the alias of Jordan Lasker. The Times later updated the article to note that Crémieux 'writes often about IQ and race.' The Post has sought comment from Rufo and Mamdani. Lasker was not immediately available for comment. Jane Kirtley, a media ethics professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, questioned the decision to grant the source anonymity. 'It seems a little disingenuous to play this game of 'We know something you don't know,'' she said. 'Why would you promise him anonymity and then play hide-the-ball with the readers?' She added: 'My question is: Why would you have even made that promise to this individual in the first instance? I don't see the need.' The story also caused friction within the Times newsroom. 'People are really upset,' one Times journalist told Semafor. Times columnist Jamelle Bouie was particularly vocal, posting on Bluesky: 'i think you should tell readers if your source is a nazi.' He deleted that post — and others expressing frustration with the article — citing a violation of Times social media guidelines. Bouie did not respond to a request for comment. Lydia Polgreen, another Times columnist, shared her perspective without directly commenting on the story's newsworthiness. 'I can see why a political young man like Zohran might fill out his college application the way he did,' she wrote on Twitter. 'Because if you are like me, you struggle to be known in this country. Our visual sorting is so simplistic and quite brutal.' Polgreen, who is biracial with African parents, said she understood Mamdani's identification choices. The Times leadership stood by the reporting. According to Semafor, senior editors were aligned in their decision to publish and approved the story after a standard editorial review. A senior Times reporter defended the story by pointing to the public conversation it had sparked. 'The fact that this story engendered all the conversation and debate that it has feels like all the evidence you need that this was a legit line of reporting,' the reporter said. Still, critics questioned the newsworthiness of the article and the Times' choice to base it on stolen records.
