Almost four months after the Trump administration announced plans to cut more than half a billion dollars in Brown’s federal research funding, the University has reached an agreement with the government to restore funding and eligibility for future awards.
At first glance, the agreement may seem to offer Trump a win in his crusade against higher education, setting the dangerous precedent that an administration can get away with unwarranted attacks on universities. However, in reality, Brown, which claims it is already in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, has traded little in exchange for the restoration of its research funding.
First, the agreement states that Brown “denies liability regarding the United States’ allegations” of discrimination and that “no provision of this agreement … shall be construed as giving the United States authority to dictate Brown’s curriculum or the content of academic speech.” In clearly stating that the agreement is not an admission of guilt and ensuring that the federal government cannot interfere with academic freedom at Brown, the University has upheld its intellectual integrity and protected the rights of its students and faculty.
In response to the Trump administration’s concerns about campus antisemitism, President Christina Paxson P’19 P’MD’20 has committed “to taking significant, proactive, effective steps to combat antisemitism and ensure a campus environment free from harassment and discrimination.” This, too, is in line with our values. Brown has an obligation to protect all of its students from discrimination, and this agreement simply sheds light on existing plans to strengthen scholarship on Judaism and Israel, survey campus climate and ensure safety for all students.
Under its terms, Brown will now provide additional reporting to the federal government about reports of antisemitism on College Hill. Although this concession may represent a federal overreach, we have confidence that Brown is already in compliance with anti-discrimination law, as per the University’s previous voluntary resolution with the Biden administration. This represents yet another opportunity for the federal government to witness College Hill’s thriving Jewish community and further demonstrates that the University takes seriously the legitimate concerns of Jewish students at a time of increased antisemitism nationwide.
Another area where Brown seemingly makes concessions is regarding diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in admissions and University programs. Regardless of your position on race-conscious admissions practices, Brown must continue to obey the Supreme Court’s prohibition of the practice. While we concede that the government overreaches in demanding sensitive data regarding applicants, we strongly believe officials will find that Brown does not racially discriminate in the admissions process. And none of this, of course, precludes implementing existing plans to maintain a diverse student body through outreach to diverse groups of applicants.
Perhaps, the greatest impact of this agreement will be felt by transgender and gender-nonconforming community members who face restrictions on participation in women’s sports and female-only housing. However, in practice, this agreement does not change the University’s current athletics policies. Brown, as a member of the Ivy League athletic conference, was already bound by NCAA rules, which were changed in February to exclude transgender women athletes nationally.
Furthermore, although limitations placed on housing are troubling, they don’t impact the vast majority of on-campus housing options, including gender-inclusive housing. Additionally, on-campus affinity centers will continue to support transgender and gender-nonconforming students, and University Health Services can continue to provide gender-affirming care to students over the age of 18, who make up the vast majority of students on campus.
In exchange for the return of federal funds, Brown has pledged to invest $50 million in Rhode Island workforce development organizations over the next 10 years, an amount far less than the amount of funding restored under the agreement. If it took demands by the federal government to get Brown to invest further in the local community that it has benefited from immensely over the last 260 years, then so be it. A monetary investment that will promote job growth in Brown’s backyard — and not give a penny to the Trump administration — seems like a win to us.
The truth of the matter is that Brown cannot afford to lose $3.5 million per week in unpaid grants. At the same time, our independence and core values cannot be put up for sale, nor can we allow the University to censor protected speech. Luckily, this agreement requires neither, and the lax terms demanded point to a serious weakness in the government’s case.
Although we believe that if Brown were to go to court, the University would prevail, the years that might pass before a resolution could cause irreparable damage to the lifesaving research and world-altering teaching missions of the University. No one wanted Brown to face this scrutiny, yet in securing a fair deal, Paxson has shown the indispensability of the work we do for the nation and a deep commitment to our shared values.
Editorials are written by The Herald’s editorial page board, and its views are separate from those of The Herald’s newsroom and the 135th Editorial Board, which leads the paper. This editorial was written by Meher Sandhu ’25.5, Ben Aizenberg ’26, Tas Rahman ’26, Rchin Bari ’28 and Ethan Canfield ’28.
