top of page

Blog! Blog! Blog!

Search

Federal Overreach Hits Higher Education

Since President Trump’s reelection in 2024, his administration has moved quickly to expand its influence over historically independent institutions. The results have been dramatic and immediate, with thousands of Americans already feeling the effects of massive federal funding cuts. This overreach is particularly visible in higher education, specifically in the Department of Education’s ideological hijacking of public university funding.

On October 1st, the administration sent a document titled the “Compact for Excellence in Higher Education” to nine universities. The compact demands sweeping policy changes as a condition for maintaining federal funding. This includes: new restrictions on campus speech, a narrow redefinition of gender, a ban on considering race and sex in financial aid, and even a cap on international student enrollment. It also requires universities to “abolish institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”

Behind the rhetoric of “defending Title IX” and “protecting disenfranchised students” there is a clear agenda. The Trump administration is seeking not to promote fairness, but to align higher education with right-wing ideology, suppress dissent, and ensure federal control over academic spaces meant to be governed by free inquiry.

Seven of the nine targeted universities, Brown, Dartmouth, MIT, Penn, USC, UVA, and Arizona, have already rejected the compact outright. Only the University of Texas and Vanderbilt remain undecided. These institutions, many backed by massive endowments and strong reputations, have the financial independence to defy federal pressure.

But what about public universities like UIC, which rely heavily on federal and state funds? If the figurative eye of Sauron turns toward us, what choices do we have?

Federal courts have already signaled skepticism toward these interventions. In August, a federal judge in Maryland, ironically appointed by Trump, ruled that the administration had overstepped its authority by coercing universities to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. Although the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in 2023, legal experts agree that the new compact goes far beyond that ruling, infringing on both free speech and financial aid autonomy.

So where does that leave UIC? Do we comply early to avoid scrutiny? Do we risk retaliation to defend our principles?


Last week, UIC announced that it would remove consideration of race, color, national origin, sex, and gender from financial aid, hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions. University of Illinois System President Timothy Killeen described the move as an effort to “reduce risk” and ensure compliance with federal funding agencies. “We’re going to do … a deep, deep analysis of all the projects we have, line by line,” Killeen said, “and make sure that there’s no sense of discrimination.”


At first glance, language about “ending discrimination” might sound like progress. But the reality is this policy actually erases tools designed to correct the effects of long standing discrimination. For decades, UIC and other public universities have offered targeted scholarships and initiatives for students from underrepresented communities. These programs acknowledge that opportunity in America has never been equally distributed. 


Under this new policy, those supports could disappear. Scholarships that once prioritized first-generation college students, women in STEM, or students from communities historically excluded from higher education are now under review. Thousands of UIC students rely on such programs not as advantages, but as bridges across structural barriers that still exist.


The implications of these changes are immense, yet the conversation around them has been minimal. If you didn’t happen to check the news, or this blog, you might not have known at all. For a university that has long celebrated its commitment to access and inclusion, the quiet nature of this decision struck many as dissonant. How can an institution champion diversity while quietly dismantling the policies that make it possible?


UIC is a federally designated Minority-Serving Institution, and in 2018 it earned the Higher Education Excellence in Diversity (HEED) Award from INSIGHT Into Diversity magazine, the nation’s oldest diversity-focused higher education publication. That recognition wasn’t just symbolic, it reflected a genuine institutional commitment to equity and mobility. Those values are now being tested by political and financial pressure. 


To me, that legacy is worth defending. Whether UIC’s compliance represents prudent risk management or premature surrender may depend on what happens next. But UIC’s reputation as a diverse, upwardly mobile institution was not built quietly, and it should not be undone quietly either.


Why This Belongs on a Radio Blog


UIC Radio is a platform for entertainment, and it’s also a space for free speech first and foremost. When university leadership fails to protect that principle, when they bend to political pressure, it becomes our responsibility to speak on it. Talking about these issues is how we hold institutions accountable, and defend the values that make UIC a place where all voices can be heard. The “microphone” that radio provides me feels especially important in these moments. 


If you want to read more:

Sources on UI system and UIC policy changes:

Judge strikes down Trump admin guidance against DEI programs at schools (from August)- https://www.npr.org/2025/08/15/nx-s1-5503319/judge-strump-dei-programs-schools


Comments

bottom of page