As tensions escalate between the federal government and higher education institutions, Notre Dame has opted for a watchful, coordinated response while peer institutions such as Harvard prepare to challenge the Trump administration in court. University administration and political science faculty offered perspective on this approach to The Observer.
The Trump administration’s recent actions — including threats to withdraw federal funding, investigations into diversity and inclusion initiatives and visa scrutiny affecting international students — have targeted a select group of primarily private, research-driven institutions. These moves have prompted concerns across the academic landscape regarding constitutional protections, institutional autonomy and the politicization of federal agencies.
Political science professor David Campbell, director of the Notre Dame Democracy Initiative, described the situation as “a broadside — I think I would say attack — on higher education.”
Within Notre Dame’s administration, the response has been measured. “We are actively monitoring the situation in Washington and working to document the impacts thus far,” Pedro Ribeiro, vice president for public affairs and communications, wrote.
“We are also coordinating with key partners, such as the Association of American Universities (AAU), the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities (ACCU) and the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU), to underscore the value of what we do as a leading global Catholic research university, from educating future leaders to advancing human understanding through research,” Ribeiro added.
Ribeiro also addressed student concerns about recent visa-related changes affecting international students. “While privacy laws preclude us from commenting on any particular student’s immigration status, we have been in contact with all of our international students to alert them to resources available to them on campus, and we continue to monitor their situations closely,” he wrote. “Our international students and scholars and their families are important and vital members of our campus community, and we will continue working to ensure that they are welcomed and supported at Notre Dame.”
Campbell noted that the universities under investigation share certain traits. “It is notable that the institutions that the Trump administration has targeted are all private institutions. They are all elite, if you want to put it that way, or highly selective admissions,” he said. “I think it’s fair to say one of the reasons why it’s those institutions that have been targeted is because they’re the least likely, it is thought, to have public sympathy.”
He also pointed to the administration’s broader ideological outlook. “The Trump administration’s obviously conservative. And so there’s this belief that universities are institutions of the left,” he said. “If you're a conservative, you may not like what’s happening at many universities.”
He added that the focus on elite research institutions may reflect a deeper shift in federal funding priorities. “These are institutions — Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Columbia — that are major sources of the production of research. And so if the administration wants to clamp down on the kind of research that’s being done, this is a sort of target that you might expect them to go after.”
Notre Dame, Campbell explained, has not yet been publicly drawn into the conflict. “Notre Dame as an institution has thus far — but I should stress only thus far — been mostly insulated from the sort of actions that we’ve seen from the administration,” he said.
“Our religious character probably does somewhat insulate us,” Campbell added, “but I wouldn't want to overstate that, because I do think that every university is vulnerable at this moment.”
As Harvard and other institutions move toward legal action, law scholars suggest the lawsuits will challenge both the process and constitutional basis of the administration’s policies.
“Harvard has advanced (and other institutions likely will, too) a variety of constitutional, statutory, and administrative arguments against the Administration’s recent funding-freeze orders,” professor Richard Garnett of Notre Dame Law School wrote. “The claims are that the administration has not followed the required procedures for enforcing conditions on funding and that it has imposed unauthorized requirements that infringe on institutions’ First Amendment rights.”
Garnett explained that while all universities receiving federal funds accept legal conditions, those conditions cannot override constitutional protections. “There are strong arguments that the strings currently attached to federal funds do not include the power to impose ideological requirements on universities’ core academic decisions and practices,” he wrote. “Any university — public or private — that accepts federal funding may be subject to the reasonable, relevant conditions that are attached to that funding. But those conditions must be consistent with the First Amendment’s free-speech and religious-freedom guarantees.”
Other scholars emphasized the political dimensions of the current moment.
“It’s clear that the Trump administration prizes ideological loyalty over administrative expertise,” constitutional studies professor Matthew Hall wrote. “I think they will continue to demand ideological purity from every part of the executive branch.”
For Hall, Notre Dame’s response should be grounded in its academic mission. “It’s critical that Notre Dame continues to assess the institutional, psychological, and social factors that are reshaping our society through the nonpartisan application of objective social science,” he wrote.
Looking forward, Campbell believes the moment requires more than caution — it demands collective action and clarity. “This is a moment of reckoning,” he said. “Universities need to decide what they stand for. This is a time to stand up in the public square and say: this is what we do as universities. We are engines of social mobility. We educate the young people of America. We conduct vital research.”
He pointed to a recent joint statement endorsed by over 400 institutions, including Notre Dame, as a step in that direction. “Rather than the institutions compete against one another, higher ed — whether public, private, community colleges, or research institutions — needs to speak with one voice and defend what it does,” he said.
“Just imagine an America without its universities,” Campbell said. “Probably not a place most people would want to live.”
