Key Points:
- Brown declines to join Trump’s “Compact for Academic Excellence,” becoming the second institution after MIT to reject it.
- President Paxson argues the compact would restrict academic freedom and conflict with a prior agreement.
- The proposed compact would have imposed university policy changes in exchange for priority federal funding.
Brown Pushes Back on Conditional Funding Deal
Brown University President Christina Paxson formally declined to sign the Trump administration’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” writing to Education Secretary Linda McMahon that the deal would undermine the university’s autonomy and curtail academic freedom.
The compact, initially sent to nine elite institutions, would have offered preferential access to federal funding in exchange for colleges adopting strict policy changes: capping international student enrollment at 15%, banning race or sex in hiring and admissions decisions, and enforcing a biological definition of gender.
Schools that departed from those policies risked losing federal benefits. MIT declined last week, and Brown’s refusal layers additional resistance to the administration’s strategy.
In her letter, Paxson emphasized that the university had already signed a July agreement with the administration that preserved core principles of self-governance and protected curriculum decisions. She argued that the compact’s terms lacked those safeguards and would allow funding decisions based on ideological criteria rather than research merit.
Higher Education Under Pressure: Funding and Freedom at Stake
The Trump administration has used federal funding and contracts as leverage to impose policy changes on universities, canceling or withholding contracts when institutions resisted. Some of those cuts were later reversed by court order.
Supporters of Brown’s decision praised the move. The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) noted that no level of federal inducement should compromise the freedom to question, explore, and dissent. Paxson’s rejection aligns with MIT’s stance, reinforcing calls by higher-education leaders for maintaining institutional independence.
While the compact remains open for acceptance by other colleges, many across academia see it as a political attempt to centralize control over university governance and restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. Brown remains committed to its existing agreement with the federal government, which affirms principles such as preserving content autonomy and merit-based research evaluation.
As the debate over this compact unfolds, Brown’s refusal sends a strong message: for many universities, the price of accepting policy mandates is too high when it threatens their core mission of free inquiry and self-governance.