Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
In recent weeks, nine universities across the country received an offer from the Trump administration to give preference for federal funding in exchange for agreeing to demands laid out by the White House. These demands included capping the number of international students, banning the use of sex and gender in determining admission and a commitment to getting rid of programs that “purposefully punish, belittle and even spark violence against conservative ideas.” Against this backdrop of government overreach, the University of Connecticut, while it has not received such a letter, has taken several actions that point towards realigning itself with President Donald Trump’s view of higher education. The Editorial Board urges UConn not to capitulate to the Trump administration, whether it be in the face of overt or covert pressure, and preserve its dignity as an institution.
Much of the Trump administration’s ire with higher education lies in their contempt for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. During Trump’s second term, he has spoken about the “tyranny” of such initiatives and vowed to get rid of them both in the government and the private sector. Before October of this year, UConn had two departments that covered DEI: The Office for Institutional Equity and the Office for Diversity and Inclusion. Now, however, UConn has combined those two departments into the far more sanitary-sounding Office for Inclusion and Civil Rights. By conveniently doing away with the words “diversity” and “equity,” UConn has eliminated the topics that are most anathema to the Trump administration. In a different era, this consolidation might have seemed innocent, but Trump’s influence makes it difficult to construe UConn’s decision as anything other than toeing the government line.
Another indication of UConn’s tiptoeing around Trump is their decisions on offering certain classes. UConn recently considered eliminating a U.S. Anti-Black Racism (ABR) class at the last University Senate meeting. Senate Executive Committee Chair Bob Day explicitly said in the meeting that the federal government’s new guidance on DEI means the ABR course would “be considered illegal,” adding that it “calls out a particular racial or ethnic group.” This reasoning shows that UConn is trying to adhere to Trump’s interpretation of reality. In the process, they are rolling back the university’s progress on DEI. Despite UConn’s stated commitment to diversity, their actions indicate they are more interested in appeasing the government. In fact, S. Pamir Alpay, interim provost, avoided answering a question about conceding to federal demands, saying only that UConn would abide by the law. In other words, instead of challenging the administration’s view on DEI, UConn is ready to defer to Trump to avoid a whiff of legal trouble.
In addition to reconsidering potentially unacceptable classes, UConn is also planning to align their research more with federal priorities, according to The Daily Campus. Responding to an expected lack of federal funding in the next four years, UConn sent out a letter in the spring 2025 semester outlining what research the Trump administration wants. The government’s priorities included AI, energy independence and national security. As with the consolidation of offices, attempting to align with federal priorities might seem trivial at first — it makes sense for universities to get as much government funding as they can for their important work. But in the current climate, this decision is inherently political, since it is partly tied to already-realized fears that federal funding will be rescinded. UConn’s realignment on research, like their other avoidant actions, indicates that rather than standing against Trump’s assault on funding, they are going down quietly.
All universities have a commitment to academic freedom, meaning that they should be independent of federal government overreach and influence. Higher education needs to reaffirm its dedication to this principle, not preemptively bow down to an administration that is extremely hostile to colleges. Across the country, many institutions have already rejected Trump’s funding manipulations, and UConn ought to stand in solidarity with them. The Editorial Board recognizes that UConn is a public university and has less leeway than private institutions to dictate policy; after all, UConn is partly a representation of Connecticut itself. However, instead of acquiescing to Trump’s pressure, UConn must change its present course and restore the priority of academic freedom. UConn should seriously ask itself the question: if presented with Trump’s offer to receive priority on funding, would they do it? Would they forget their dignity, responsibilities and the need to respect their students and faculty? This is the fundamental problem at the heart of UConn’s growing capitulation to the federal government, and The Editorial Board believes this new shift towards Trump must stop.