On May 1, traditionally known as National College Decision Day, millions of eager students worldwide made one of the most significant decisions of their lives: choosing which college to attend for the next four years. However, in a recent wave of demands by the Trump Administration, stripping several elite institutions of federal funding, many students are left worried and confused regarding their future enrollment plans.
Over the course of 13 weeks, President Trump left universities stunned as he denied Columbia University $400 million and forced the institution to undergo a review of the academic department in the wake of disciplining pro-Palestinian protesters, reforming the college admissions process, and eliminating DEI programs. With a litany of at tacks against universities such as Northwestern, Cornell, Brown, and Princeton, lawyers, policy analysts, and administrators around the nation voiced their concerns regarding the administration’s lack of clear explanations or legal rationale that could transform postsecondary education for the foreseeable future according to The Wall Street Journal.
Senior Dylan Comis, who will be attending Cornell, says “I am not concerned necessarily about the quality of education, as I think the Ivies and T20 universities would not sacrifice the quality that they have built their reputa- tions on, even with the current administration cracking down on them, but I am concerned about diversity, especially as funding is being pulled away from or paused at these universities.”
In an interview with Inside Higher Education, John King Jr., the Secretary of Education under President Obama, expressed his worries, saying, Trump’s actions really threaten the long-standing partnership between the federal government and higher education”. However, in light of Trump’s public criticism regarding campus protests, especially those related to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Supporters of Trump believe that campus safety is a priority, and by labeling the protests as disruptive, he has emphasized protecting students who may feel threatened, especially Jewish students.
He recently signed an executive order in 2025 directing federal agencies to combat antisemitism by holding perpetrators of unlawful harassment accountable. Some believe universities should focus on academics instead of being distracted by and suspending classes for political protests. Harvard University, which popped up on the Trump administration’s radar, faced an astonishing $2 billion in federal funds being frozen. The White House demanded that the university comply with its demands regarding modifications in the hiring process, admissions, and teaching practices that combat antisemitism. While most funding is designated for scientific research, denying universities funding could also impede student loan programs.
In a letter to Harvard by the administration, which was obtained by The New York Times, the school failed to uphold the “intellectual and civil rights conditions” that would prove necessary to receive federal funding. The Joint Task Force to combat antisemitism demanded that Harvard implement changes that address antisemitism and civil rights violations that strive to restrict student clubs and federally audit the campus’s “viewpoint diversity” with Leo Terrel, the Task Force leader, saying “Anti-Semitism in any environment is repugnant to this nation’s ideals.”
In addition, the letter included 10 categories for necessary change, including: Reporting students to federal authorities for expressing views deemed “hostile” to American values, mandating that each academic department include diverse viewpoints, including a government-approved auditor to evaluate programs and departments accused of fostering antisemitic harassment, and conducting plagiarism checks on faculty members Students continued to urge Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, not to comply with these demands, Harvard became one of the first major institutions to reject the letter.
In a letter to the Harvard community, that the university would not comply and surrender its independence or “relinquish its constitutional rights under the First Amendment protecting freedom of speech.” Although Harvard expresses their frustration over the attack, their free speech is still protected as Trump and his supporters argue that there are limits, mainly if protests include harassment, property damage, or intimidation. In response to Harvard, the administration swiftly froze billions of dollars in multi-year grant funding and $60 million in contracts while also removing Harvard’s tax-exempt status. Experts say the Trump administration’s recent efforts to pressure colleges to align with its agenda are truly unprecedented on their sheer scale, given the billions in funding that is currently at stake and the breadth of investigations that span across multiple federal agencies.
Although the Education Department has traditionally spearheaded efforts to hold colleges accountable by using student aid as leverage, the recent coordinated push across the federal government has involved limiting scientific research grants that have been historically protected from political exploitation. With the onslaught of threats regarding funding, a broad spectrum of university research, including studies on cancer, tuberculosis, and climate change, has been at risk of being halted. While universities are trying to grapple with the massive funding cuts from the Trump Administration, US institutions now face another looming threat regarding their financial stability: a potential decline in revenue from international students.
As Trump started revoking hundreds of student visas in demanding that colleges comply with the administration’s agenda, international students interested in studying in the US have second thoughts about enrolling, while many schools’ ability to enroll foreign students has been jeopardized. Even with over 1.1 million international students enrolling at American education institutions, a record high, according to the Institute of International Education, this could significantly change after Trump took office.
The main problem arises when foreign students who are more prone to paying full tuition compared to their American counterparts, which aids in funding for colleges, choose to attend elsewhere, meaning financial trouble for the US institutions that rely on them. As May 1 comes around the corner, the Common App has noticed a decrease in international applications, especially from China, which, according to CNN, supplies 25% of foreign students. This comes after more than 1,000 international students had their visas revoked or statuses terminated since January, with some high-profile cases involving students allegedly affiliated with terror organizations and others with minor misdemeanors.
In taking visas away, students are inherently stripped of their legal status in the US and are forced to leave their studies after being ineligible for federal financial aid and paying full tuition. Despite three-quarters of international students funding their education and less than one-fifth receiving funding from their university, based on data from the Institute of International Education, the current government, which is fixated on the economy and net profits, has scared many international students away. Historically speaking, the recent influx of international students has significantly increased tuition revenue for public universities, which has crucially offset the decline in state funding, according to the American Economic Journal.
While elite institutions like Harvard faces the brute financial setbacks from a dip in international enrollment, public research universities with smaller endowments could be hit even harder. As tensions between federal policies and higher education institutions grow, the underlying message seems to be that they either fall in line or risk losing not only billions of dollars in funding but also elements of academic independence. “I think it is unfortunate that the government is targeting education, essentially a “crown jewel” of this country; education is the path to liberation and promotes intellectual and economic greatness. There really is no upside to destroying higher education, be it Cornell or any other institution,” Dylan said.
