The debate over academic freedom deepened Thursday as the University of Southern California, USC, and the University of Pennsylvania ,Penn,formally rejected the Trump university funding compact, a White House proposal offering expanded federal funding in exchange for sweeping policy changes.
The compact, sent to nine prestigious institutions on October 1, promised “preferential access” to federal grants for schools agreeing to implement ideological reforms including removing sex and ethnicity from admissions, capping international enrollment at 15%, freezing tuition for five years, and adopting “biological” definitions of gender.
According to the White House, the initiative aims at “the proactive improvement of higher education for the betterment of the country.”
However, universities and academic leaders see it differently describing the offer as an unprecedented attempt to exert political control over higher education.
So far, USC, Penn, Brown University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have rejected the compact outright, while others, including Vanderbilt University, University of Arizona, and the University of Virginia, say they are reviewing it.
University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson said Penn’s decision followed consultations with faculty, trustees, and students.
“While we support improving higher education, the compact’s provisions threaten core principles of free inquiry,” he said.
READ ALSO:EU supports Trump-Putin meet in search for peace
USC Interim President Beong-Soo Kim echoed that sentiment, warning that accepting the deal “would, over time, undermine the same values of free inquiry and academic excellence that the compact seeks to promote.”
Kim also cautioned that “linking research benefits to ideological conformity” could damage America’s reputation for innovation and merit-based academic standards.
A copy of the document obtained by CNN revealed that signatory universities would have to assess “faculty and staff viewpoints,” reform or close “units hostile to conservative ideas,” and enforce “grade integrity.”
In return, the White House said participating schools would receive priority consideration for federal grants, event invitations, and “expanded partnerships.”
Brown University President Christina H. Paxson wrote that the compact “would restrict academic freedom and undermine university governance.”
Similarly, MIT President Sally Kornbluth said the proposal “includes principles that would restrict freedom of expression and institutional independence.”
Several state officials have also weighed in. California Governor Gavin Newsom warned that any public university in his state signing the compact could lose state funding.
While some institutions are reviewing the compact, others have taken a firm stand. The University of Virginia said it would be “difficult to agree to certain provisions,” while Dartmouth College President Sian Leah Beilock pledged never to “compromise our academic freedom and ability to govern ourselves.”
However, the University of Texas at Austin struck a more neutral tone, stating it “welcomes the opportunity to work with the Trump administration.”
The Trump administration’s compact is part of a broader effort to reshape higher education governance. A CNN analysis revealed that universities targeted in similar policy disputes increased their federal lobbying expenses by 122% in 2025 compared with the previous year.
As the November 21 deadline for signing approaches, most universities appear unlikely to accept. For many, the cost of compliance in autonomy and credibility may far outweigh the promise of increased funding.
