‘Not negotiable’: MIT turns down Trump proposal tying federal funds to ideological rules

The president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sally Kornbluth, publicly rejected a White House proposal that would have required the university to align with President Donald Trump’s political priorities in exchange for preferential access to federal research funding. 

In a letter to Trump administration officials, Kornbluth wrote that she “cannot support” the proposal, arguing that it undermines the university’s principles of academic freedom, independence, and the merit-based allocation of scientific funding. 

“Scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone,” Kornbluth stated, emphasizing MIT’s long-held commitment to free inquiry and intellectual openness. 

The “Compact for Academic Excellence” offer 

The proposal, titled the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” was circulated last week to nine prominent US universities, including MIT and the University of Texas at Austin. The White House described the compact as an opportunity offering “multiple positive benefits,” including “substantial and meaningful federal grants” and potential support from private donors. 

In return, the universities would have to agree to a series of conditions: 

• Prohibit consideration of race, gender, or political beliefs in admissions, scholarships, or programs. 
• Freeze tuition for five years. 
• Adopt a strict legal definition of gender. 
• Maintain institutional neutrality in public statements or representation. 

Universities were asked to submit their responses by October 20. 

Pushback over free speech, institutional autonomy 

While the University of Texas system called the invitation an “honor,” most institutions have refrained from public comment as they review the terms. MIT, however, became one of the first to respond forcefully against it. 

Kornbluth said that the compact’s provisions risk eroding university independence and curbing free expression on campuses. “The proposal contains several provisions that are inconsistent with MIT’s core mission as a research university committed to free expression and academic independence,” she wrote. 

Free speech advocates and higher education experts echoed MIT’s concerns, warning that the proposal could politicise research funding and restrict open academic discourse. 

Critics warn of risks & retaliation 

According to the compact, institutions that reject the agreement could lose access to federal research grants, student loan programs, and even visas for international students and scholars. 

“The compact gives the illusion of choice,” said one higher education policy analyst. “Universities that decline are effectively punished through loss of access to essential federal benefits.” 

A White House official, however, maintained that the initiative was voluntary and that “several colleges have already expressed interest in signing on.” 

Growing standoff between academia & Washington 

The proposal marks the latest flashpoint in an escalating struggle between the Trump administration and the academic community over issues such as diversity policies, free speech, and federal funding. 

In recent months, the administration has reportedly frozen research grants and launched civil rights investigations into universities over perceived ideological bias. The compact, critics say, represents a further step toward politicising academic governance. 

Kornbluth’s statement positions MIT as a leading voice of resistance within higher education — signaling that at least some of America’s top universities are unwilling to trade autonomy for funding. 

“Our mission demands that we defend academic freedom and the independence of science,” Kornbluth concluded. “Those principles are not negotiable.”