America finds itself divided once again as universities become the front lines of resistance against the threat to academic freedom.
In recent weeks, the faculties of some of the most prestigious universities in the United States, all belonging to the academic conference known as the Big Ten, have launched an unprecedented proposal: to create a mutual defense pact against pressure from the Trump administration.
The proposal, developed by professors and academic senates from institutions such as Indiana University, the University of Michigan, and the University of Minnesota, aims to protect the freedom of teaching and scientific research from what is perceived as direct political interference. According to the U.S. newspaper The Washington Post, the proponents emphasized that “academic freedom is under attack” and that universities can no longer afford to act in isolation.
The project foresees the creation of a common fund to support legal expenses, the coordination of communication strategies, and, if necessary, the initiation of joint legal actions against federal measures considered harmful to intellectual autonomy. The proponents explained that “without a united front, each university risks becoming vulnerable to retaliation.”
This move has matured in a climate of growing tension between the academic world and the White House. In recent months, the Trump administration has threatened funding cuts and publicly criticized schools accused of not cracking down hard enough on student protests, particularly those related to the Israeli-Palestinian war. Some professors described these attacks as “an attempt to intimidate us and to bend us to the will of political power.”
Particularly active in pushing for the pact has been the faculty of the University of Michigan, which, in an internal statement, reportedly urged other Big Ten members to “set aside historical differences and sports rivalries” in order to “protect the supreme value of academic independence.”
Even university leadership, though with greater caution, appears inclined to support the initiative. An anonymous university president reportedly said that “extraordinary times require extraordinary responses,” emphasizing that campuses cannot “yield to pressures that jeopardize centuries of culture and progress.”
The plan, still under development, will be discussed over the coming weeks in a series of closed-door meetings between faculty presidents and university administrators. If approved, it would represent one of the strongest collective stands taken by the American cultural sector against a sitting president.
The Big Ten initiative fits into a broader context of rising tension between American universities and the federal administration, following the Harvard case, which in recent weeks found itself at the center of a fierce clash with the White House. After refusing to fully comply with government demands regarding the management of student protests, the university saw approximately 2 billion dollars in public research funding frozen.
According to internal sources, university leaders denounced “a political use of federal funds” and described Washington’s decision as “a dangerous precedent” threatening academic autonomy. Harvard subsequently initiated legal action against the government, arguing that the measures taken represent a direct violation of the educational freedom guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Harvard case served as a detonator, convincing many other institutions of the need to adopt a tougher and more united stance to defend themselves from external attacks.
