By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Michigan State University’s Faculty Senate passed a resolution urging Big Ten universities to create a “mutual defense compact” against the Trump administration’s attacks on higher education. This compact would involve a shared defense fund providing legal, communication, and legislative support to any member institution facing political or legal infringement. The resolution follows similar actions by faculty senates at other universities, including Rutgers and Nebraska. While MSU leadership’s response remains uncertain, faculty express hope based on previous public pushback against the administration’s actions.
Read the original article here
MSU faculty, along with their colleagues across the Big Ten, are advocating for a “mutual defense compact” to collectively withstand potential attacks from the Trump administration. This isn’t just about athletics; the Big Ten universities are heavily invested in research, and many are members of the Association of American Universities (AAU), making them prime targets for any federal crackdown. The initiative highlights the unprecedented need for universities to band together against political interference.
The idea of a mutual defense compact stems from a growing concern that the Trump administration’s actions could negatively impact universities nationwide. Federal funding cuts, particularly NIH grant impoundments, are a major concern affecting nearly all institutions, regardless of size or endowment. This shared vulnerability underscores the need for unified legal strategies and resource sharing.
This proactive approach is even more crucial because the current climate suggests that individual universities facing attacks may struggle to defend themselves effectively alone. The sheer number of universities involved necessitates a collective response, and the Big Ten’s cohesive structure makes it a logical starting point for such an alliance. Though some universities may have substantial endowments, others lack the resources to engage in protracted legal battles with the federal government.
While the focus is currently on the Big Ten, the underlying principle of collaboration extends to all research institutions. The proposed compact isn’t solely a Big Ten initiative; it represents a broader movement urging universities to present a unified front against government overreach. The fear isn’t merely about funding cuts; it’s a concern about political influence extending into areas such as hiring practices, curriculum choices, and textbook selections.
The timing of the proposed compact may be linked to several factors. One possible trigger is the Trump administration’s past and continued targeting of universities over issues like transgender athletes and the promotion of “woke” policies. Even if the number of affected transgender athletes is small, the symbolic value of attacking this aspect of university life is substantial for political purposes. Moreover, the precedent set by actions against prominent universities, such as Harvard, acts as a wake-up call for institutions of all sizes.
The need for this “mutual defense compact” reflects a deeply worrying trend of political interference in higher education. The notion that universities need to form defensive alliances to protect themselves from the actions of the president highlights a profound shift in the landscape of academic freedom. For faculty members, this concern translates into a necessity to safeguard their research, their teaching, and the very essence of academic freedom.
The decision by some universities to initially remain silent in the face of pressure is being criticized by others. These actions, perceived as tacit acceptance of undue influence, reinforce the urgency for a collective response. It highlights how the risks to academic freedom can be greatly amplified if institutions fail to act in concert.
The ongoing uncertainty surrounding the potential for further government actions emphasizes the importance of university collaboration and proactive defense. The creation of a powerful collective voice across institutions is seen as crucial to resist any attempt to undermine the integrity and independence of higher education. This movement isn’t just about funding; it’s a fight for the very soul of academic freedom. The call for a mutual defense pact highlights the extent to which universities are now compelled to organize defensively to safeguard their autonomy. The fight for higher education’s independence has become a collective battle.
The sentiment among faculty reflects a sense of urgency and determination to protect the future of their institutions. This proposed alliance, regardless of its ultimate success, underscores a fundamental shift in how universities perceive their role in the political landscape, and the necessity of unity in the face of external threats. The hope is that this collaborative approach will provide a robust shield against political interference, allowing universities to focus on their core mission of teaching, research, and service.