The Daily Pennsylvanian Editorial Board calls for the University to reject the Trump administration’s compact of operational principles.
Credit: Ellie Pirtle
Nearly two weeks ago, the White House invited Penn and eight other universities to sign the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” a memo that “represents the priorities of the U.S. government” and invites universities to agree to its terms in exchange for “federal benefits.”
The government is promising priority access to “substantial and meaningful federal grants” and other benefits to universities that sign — including preferential treatment in federal research awards, invitations to White House events, and closer consultation with federal officials. Although the administration insists that it will not deny funds to non-signatories, it makes clear that those who sign would be first in line for these advantages. While this may seem tempting, Penn would face significant risks and moral qualms if our administrators chose to sign the compact.
Many of the compact’s demands directly contradict Penn’s commitment to its core values, including “free expression and inquiry.” The compact would require an unnecessarily strict definition of gender, a cap on international student enrollment, complete institutional neutrality, and the protection of “conservative ideas.” These positions lie plainly at odds with the principles of academic freedom and represent a deep government intrusion into higher education. We can’t let Penn descend into further fascism.
This compact isn’t just bad policy. It’s illegal — and Penn’s own faculty agrees. The Trump administration is trying to wrap censorship under the guise of reform: Demanding that universities “protect conservative ideas” in exchange for federal funding is a clear violation of free speech. A university that signs away its rights to think freely is no longer a university — it’s a puppet of the state. If Penn signs this deal, we won’t simply be giving in to the White House, we’d be inviting the administration for dinner at College Hall. We also must ask ourselves: If Penn signs the compact, what other requirements could trickle down from the administration later on?
Harvard University’s legal victory against the administration’s research funding freeze demonstrates that Penn does, in fact, have the option to combat these demands instead of blindly caving to them. Earlier this summer, Penn agreed to strip a former transgender athlete of her records in exchange for the restoration of $175 million of its funding. In doing so, the University failed to stand up for its values, instead prioritizing political appeasement. We cannot act with this same negligence moving forward.
Some might argue that Penn should sign the compact — after all, it capitulated earlier this year, so why not do the same now? Given that Penn has already committed to institutional neutrality, is required by law to reject affirmative action, and admitted about 15% international students to the Class of 2029, we already seem to align with many of the compact’s demands. Would it really burden us to shift our definition of gender and freeze tuition for a few years? But the problem is simple: While we may already adhere to some tenets of 1968 Wharton graduate and President Donald Trump’s agreement, it’s never the government’s place to tell our university how to run itself.
If Penn resists, it runs the risk of positioning itself in an unfavorable spot with the government, which could affect future federal funding that we depend on for success. However, two wrongs do not make a right, and the University cannot continue bending the knee to this administration. We risk so much more by agreeing to the compact than by rejecting it.
Penn was handpicked to consider this agreement because the Trump administration considers it one of the “good actors” among universities. But our decision could set the tone for our peer institutions. If we concede our power and sign the university and its views over to the government, we take another step towards a totalitarian regime and make it harder for other universities to stand up in protest when called on. We must defer to our founding values, not become a university beholden to Trump.
By signing the compact, Penn would normalize conditional funding for ideological compliance, allowing future political administrations to impose new demands at will.
As Penn President Larry Jameson acknowledged in an email to the Penn community, the University’s response to the White House will “rely on a set of principles drawn from Penn’s values and mission.” Those values include academic freedom, inclusion, and scholarly autonomy, all of which stand entirely at odds with the compact — and are values we must protect.
THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN EDITORIAL BOARD consists of senior staffers in the Opinion Department led by the DP’s Editorial Board Chair Sangitha Aiyer. The team for this piece includes Jack Lakis, Ananya Shah, Harman Chahal, Mritika Senthil, and Mia Vesely. Questions and comments should be directed to letters@thedp.com.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.