Columbia University and Moral Failure in the Age of Authoritarianism

Columbia University Alma Mater, 2014. (Photo/Beyond My Ken)

By Steven Hankins

As the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term nears its end, Columbia University has failed to protect its students from his attacks on academic freedom.

Over the past year, Columbia has become one of the Trump administration’s primary targets in its assaults on college campuses. The administration exploited the national media attention Columbia received from the 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment to infringe upon the academic freedoms of university students and faculty. Columbia’s administration responded to this federal overreach with passivity, not only putting the safety and freedoms of its students at risk, but also empowering the Trump administration to act more brazenly with other universities and the general public.

This past March, the White House threatened to cut $400 million in federal funding from Columbia. Shortly after, Columbia students Mohsen Mahdawi (GS ‘25, SIPA ‘27) and Mahmoud Khalil (SIPA ‘24) were detained by the federal government for their roles in the 2024 protests. Instead of Columbia taking legal action—as Harvard did in response to similar funding cuts—or using its $15.9 billion endowment as a buffer—Columbia caved to the federal government in July and granted the Trump administration unprecedented oversight power on speech and academic decision-making.

Columbia’s compliance is exactly what fascist governments exploit to test their power. By rapidly accepting the terms of Trump’s deal to protect its future financial interests, Columbia is steadily being broken down by an oppressive regime that seeks unchecked power.

In describing institutional decay, American historian Timothy Snyder uses the term “anticipatory obedience” to describe how individuals and organizations preemptively accommodate or conform to what a government wants, which often happens subtly through positive signaling to an authoritarian regime. For example, to illustrate a point about “accepting opposing viewpoints,” Barnard President Laura Ann Rosenbury recently equated blaming Charlie Kirk’s assassination on his support for gun rights with blaming instances of sexual assault on a victim’s clothing. This comparison was especially shocking given her audience: Barnard is a women’s college in which the vast majority of students report personally knowing victims of sexual assault. President Rosenbury’s remarks, viewed alongside her previous statements that framed pro-Palestinian protests on campus as “campus disruptions”, mirror Trump administration values. Although not directly compelled to do so, Rosenbury lines up her rhetoric to appease the federal government, illustrating the anticipatory obedience that Snyder warns about.

In recent weeks, seven other colleges have rejected Trump’s policy compacts that give funding priority to compliant universities. Though several of these universities have established deals with the Trump administration before, they are now putting up resistance, unlike Columbia. If the federal government can force Columbia University—an institution that ostensibly prides itself on the values of open debate and dialogue—to restrict speech on campus, then what’s to stop it from continuing its crackdown on other universities?

As faculty and senates across Big Ten universities pushed their administrations to establish an Academic Alliance pact, and hundreds of university presidents (including Columbia’s) published a joint letter against government overreach in higher education, the Trump administration ramped up its attacks on freedom of speech by pivoting to key media organizations and talk show hosts. 

In conjunction with the Trump administration’s high-profile policy victory against Columbia, the federal government revoked $1.1 billion in funding from NPR, launched multi-billion dollar lawsuits against legacy media outlets, and threatened to revoke media licenses following Jimmy Kimmel’s temporary removal by ABC from his late-night talk show. Our university has shown the government that, when faced with financial pressure, it’s all too easy for academic and media institutions to prioritize wealth over integrity.

After a media firestorm resulting in Kimmel’s reinstatement and prominent news organizations’ recent refusal to sign Pentagon media restrictions, we must ask ourselves: Where will the federal government focus its attention next as it tramples on our freedoms? What will be the next domino of freedom to fall as the Trump administration consolidates its power?

As a U.S. citizen, I am lucky to be able to speak out politically without risk of abduction and deportation. With around 50% of SIPA’s student body being international students, many others who study here cannot say the same. It’s more important than ever for Columbia students to remain vigilant against breaches in academic freedoms, and we must combat our university’s inaction by protecting groups who are most vulnerable to political attacks.

To Dean Keren Yarhi-Milo and the Columbia Administration: If you truly prioritize open discourse and the safety of your students, you must provide sufficient legal support for students targeted by the federal government. You must establish our university as a sanctuary campus in line with the policy demands from the Student Workers of Columbia.

To SIPA students and the Columbia student body: Expression, protest, and participation in the electoral process are now more important than ever in keeping democratic values alive. 

And finally, to end with the opening words of Snyder’s first chapter: “Do not obey in advance.”