MIT President Rejects Controversial White House Higher Education Proposal

Sat Oct 11 2025 00:02:49 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

Sally Kornbluth, the president of MIT, has publicly denounced a White House proposal that pressures universities to adopt political agendas in exchange for federal funding, emphasizing the need for independence in higher education.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology's president, Sally Kornbluth, has stated her opposition to a recent proposal from the White House that requires universities to align with President Trump's political aims to receive federal support. This proposal has drawn criticism from various quarters, with many viewing it as an attempt at coercive control over academic institutions. Kornbluth emphasized the importance of merit-based funding and maintaining free speech within academic settings, ultimately underscoring MIT's commitment to independent educational values.

In a bold statement against federal overreach, MIT President Sally Kornbluth announced on Friday her firm opposition to a White House proposal that requires prestigious universities to adopt political stances tied to President Donald Trump’s agenda to secure federal funding.

Kornbluth emphasized that the proposal undermines the foundational values of higher education, notably independence and free speech, which MIT upholds. She articulated that the idea of linking federal grants to adherence to specific political ideologies is inconsistent with the principles of merit-based scientific funding.

Among nine universities, MIT was one of the first to reject the proposal. Other institutions, while invited to provide feedback, have remained generally silent as they contemplate the implications of the proposal. The President of the University of Texas system expressed gratitude for their invitation, yet the atmosphere surrounding the document has been largely critical.

In Kornbluth's communication to the Trump administration officials, she stressed the implications of the proposal, which spans a variety of controversial topics, ranging from admissions criteria to funding for specific programs. She articulated that the nature of the compact constitutes potential violations of academic freedom and the autonomy of universities.

The proposal has triggered backlash among students, faculty, and higher education associations, leading some university leaders to describe it as an act of federal coercion. Tucson's mayor and city council even condemned the plan as an 'unacceptable act of federal interference.'

Even conservative voices find issues with the compact; figures like Frederick Hess, from the American Enterprise Institute, have called the approach 'problematic' and suggested that the demands lack legal grounding.

Kornbluth highlighted MIT's existing commitments that align with some of the positive aspects of the proposal, including initiatives to enhance college affordability and emphasize merit in admissions. However, she made it clear that MIT makes these choices independently as part of its mission, rather than as a condition for federal support.

The proposed compact also includes initiatives such as freezing tuition for U.S. students for five years and eliminating race and gender considerations from admissions processes—moves seen by many as steps toward promoting a conservative ideological framework within academia.

As the deadline for universities to respond looms, the higher education community is left grappling with the tensions between maintaining institutional independence and the threat of losing vital federal funding.