Columbia University is reportedly nearing a significant agreement with the Trump administration to resolve a contentious dispute over alleged failures to address antisemitism on campus, a deal that could involve the university paying hundreds of millions of dollars. While the White House is characterizing the deal as a "major victory," some "administration allies…say the deal lacks the sort of systemic reforms required to fundamentally transform the school’s culture," as stated in a tweet by Steve McGuire. This development follows months of federal pressure and substantial cuts to university funding.
The dispute escalated after the Trump administration canceled $400 million in federal funding to Columbia in March, citing the university's "inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students" amid widespread pro-Palestinian protests. Further reports indicated that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) alone froze or terminated up to $1.18 billion in unspent funding, severely impacting the university's research operations. The administration had issued a list of nine demands, including banning masks, empowering campus police, and overhauling the Middle Eastern studies department, as preconditions for restoring funds.
In response to these demands, Columbia has largely acquiesced, implementing new policies such as restrictions on protests, increased disciplinary actions, and a review of its Middle East curriculum. The proposed deal, currently in draft form, would require Columbia to provide compensation for alleged civil rights violations and enhance transparency regarding admissions and foreign gifts. Sources familiar with the discussions suggest the compensation could exceed $200 million, making it a significant financial settlement.
The potential agreement highlights the Trump administration's unprecedented intervention into the affairs of higher education institutions. While the White House views the impending deal as a success in its efforts to combat antisemitism on college campuses, critics, including some within the administration's own circles, argue that the terms may not address the deeper cultural issues. This ongoing negotiation sets a precedent for how federal authorities might engage with other universities facing similar pressures.