The Trump administration’s plan to use federal power to reshape universities has created a fascinating test of conservative principles, leading some conservatives and libertarians to balk at the proposal. While they may share the administration’s critique of liberal bias in academia, the method—direct government intervention and financial coercion—clashes with long-held conservative ideals of limited government, federalism, and free markets.
For decades, a core tenet of conservatism has been opposition to federal overreach, particularly in education, which is seen as a state and local responsibility. The compact, with its top-down mandates from Washington, runs directly counter to this principle. It represents a massive expansion of federal power into the governance of both public and private institutions.
Libertarians, in particular, are horrified by the implications for free speech. While they may want more ideological diversity on campus, they believe it must emerge organically, not be imposed by the state. The idea of the government “scrapping” academic departments and dictating curriculum is antithetical to their belief in a free marketplace of ideas, where bad ideas are defeated by better ones, not by government decree.
This has led to a split on the right. While some culture-war-focused conservatives may cheer the administration’s willingness to fight back against “woke” universities, others are deeply uncomfortable with the authoritarian means being used to achieve those ends. They see it as a case of “fighting fire with fire” that will ultimately burn down the principles they claim to defend.
The criticism from these corners is particularly significant because it cannot be dismissed as simple partisan opposition. It comes from individuals who are ideologically aligned with many of the administration’s goals but who are alarmed by its methods. Their resistance highlights the truly “radical” nature of the proposal, which seems to prioritize the immediate political goal of punishing ideological enemies over adherence to consistent conservative principles.