Trump Ramps Up His Attacks Against Universities, Demands Colleges Stop Recognising Trans People
Trump's war on higher education is another front for his war on trans people.
Last week, the Trump administration sent a ‘compact’ to 9 universities, where, in exchange for access to federal funding, these schools would have to commit to Trump’s political agenda. If a college wishes to comply, they must, among other things, remove courses that “punish, belittle, or even spark violence against conservative ideas,” essentially ban all forms of protest, ban professors from speaking about social issues or political events, prohibit race-based scholarships and events, freeze tuition rates for five years, and place a cap on international students of 15%.
As if that wasn’t enough, there are also demands surrounding trans people. Under this agreement, colleges would have to institute bathroom and changing room bans for trans students (note: the provision on sports is essentially moot because the NCAA has already implemented a ban), as well as “commit to defining and otherwise interpreting ‘male,’ ‘female,’ ‘woman,’ and ‘man’ according to reproductive function and biological processes.” Of course, all of the language used in the letter is excessively vague, and that’s for good reason. It would allow Trump to move the goalposts whenever he sees fit. But can colleges legally agree to these demands in the first place? And if they can, will they?
Setting the Example
If these demands seem familiar, that’s because they are. Back in July, Ivy League school Brown University reached a deal with the Trump administration to restore their federal funding. As part of this agreement, Brown adopted the federal definitions of ‘male’ and ‘female’ (found in EO 14168) when it came to housing and bathrooms. But there’s a caveat: this definition of ‘sex’ is actually illegal under Rhode Island law for both public accommodations and housing.
Naturally, the ACLU, GLAD Law, and the Center for Justice released a statement encouraging Brown students to reach out to them if they were affected by the new policy. This threat was enough for Brown to walk their bathroom policy back, and while the new rules surrounding student dorms haven’t been challenged, this may be thanks to gender-inclusive housing minimising the number of students with standing to sue. Regardless, Brown has not faced any consequences for that. Rather, its perceived friendliness to the Trump administration is no doubt why Brown was chosen to receive those demands: Trump wants to use them in setting the example.
Looking at the 8 other colleges handpicked by the Trump administration, only 2 are in red states: the University of Texas at Austin and Vanderbilt. Of course, UT Austin (which is controlled by the Texas governor), immediately agreed and Vanderbilt has already complied with worse, so it’s safe to say Trump’s move won’t be rebuffed by all colleges. But for many of them—especially most of the ones targeted by Trump, which are in states with strong discrimination protections—full compliance with this definition of ‘sex’ just isn’t possible.
That said, does it actually matter to Trump whether or not a school implements a trans bathroom ban? At least for now, judging by the fact that Brown has stopped receiving threats, the answer to that question seems to be no.
Thought Policing
However, that’s not all the Trump administration wants to do. For years, conservatives have claimed higher education is rigged against their ideas, and while it’s true that scholars tend to lean towards the left, at some point the right needs to ask itself how much of that comes down to the policies they advocate for. Despite this, conservatives have opted to take a different path: thought policing.
Last month, a professor at Texas A&M University was fired over stating there were more than two genders as part of a lecture. Yes, Texas A&M is among the most conservative universities in the country and is controlled by one of the most right-leaning state governments, but make no mistake: in the universities that agree to Trump’s demands, this will be the norm.
Buried in the letter is a stipulation that university employees—including professors—must remain neutral and should refrain from speaking about societal or cultural events. While this provision has a carveout for those that do so in their ‘individual capacities,’ that term is never properly defined. Will professors have to issue a disclaimer at the beginning of every class? Does committing to ‘defining and otherwise interpreting’ ‘sex’ in the way the Trump administration sees fit extend to inside the classroom?
It quickly becomes apparent that this vagueness is intentional. This gives the Trump administration leeway to brand virtually anything as a violation of the agreement and extort those who have agreed to these demands into submission. And as is stated at the top of the compact, “institutions of higher education are free to develop models and values other than those below, if the institution elects to forgo federal benefits.” Evidently, Trump seeks to transfer power from so-called ‘liberal’ schools to decidedly conservative ones, mobilising the full might of the federal government in order to achieve this.
Above all, the Trump administration has set out to remake America’s college landscape. Trump has made it abundantly clear that one way or another, he will find the conservative universities he’s been looking for. Will our nation’s institutions choose to go down without a fight? Only time will tell.