2025 AAUP Updates

After New York governor Kathy Hochul earlier this week ordered the City University of New York to remove a job posting for a professorship in Palestinian studies, AAUP president Todd Wolfson is urging Hochul and CUNY chancellor Félix Matos Rodriguez to withdraw their intervention and defer to the CUNY faculty’s judgment regarding the position and the scholarly and educational expertise it called for. Chancellor Rodríguez echoed Hochul’s criticisms of the posting and it was removed.

As Wolfson's letter points out, "amidst this extraordinarily repressive climate, it is imperative that both government and university leaders serve as bulwarks against authoritarian interference—not as further impediments to academic freedom and inquiry."

Last night, in a case in which the AAUP was a plaintiff, the US District Court for the District of Maryland granted a preliminary nationwide injunction on key parts of a pair of executive orders issued by President Trump. The orders broadly and in vague terms seek to end diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities among federal government grantees and contractors, including virtually all colleges and universities.

A new statement by AAUP President Todd Wolfson speaks out against the potential elimination of federal funding for schools that support and celebrate students from diverse backgrounds, the latest blatant attempt by the Trump administration to punish educators, target communities of color, and undermine decades of hard-won progress toward a multiracial democracy.

The AAUP and three co-plaintiffs last night sought a temporary restraining order from the federal district court to prevent the Trump administration from using two anti-DEI executive orders to terminate essential grants and contracts. As our brief explains, the orders are unconstitutional, usurping congressional power and violating First and Fifth Amendment rights.

The AAUP membership is affected by these orders in multiple ways. Our members include faculty whose work focuses on Black studies; Latino studies; Asian studies; gender or sexual orientation identities; diversity, equity, and inclusion specifically; environmental justice; and other subject matter targeted by the president’s anti-DEIA executive orders. We represent a significant number of members who focus on medical and other scientific research related to whether and how race and ethnicity affect health outcomes.

Absent preliminary relief, irreparable harm will be caused to these members, their students, and communities through the unlawful termination of billions of dollars of grants and contracts, the severe chilling of speech due to unlawful certifications and investigations, and arbitrary enforcement based on unconstitutionally vague executive orders.

Institutional neutrality is neither a necessary condition for academic freedom nor categorically incompatible with it. The statement calls for principles of academic freedom and shared governance to be chief considerations in the issuing of institutional and departmental statements as well as decisions on financial investments and campus protest policies.

The AAUP, along with the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and other plaintiffs has filed a lawsuit to block Trump’s unlawful and unconstitutional DEI executive orders, which threaten academic freedom and access to higher education for all. The lawsuit argues that Trump's orders exceed his legal authority, are overly vague, and fail to define such terms as “DEI,” “equity,” and “illegal DEIA."

Earlier this week, President Trump’s administration hit the National Institutes of Health (NIH) with a debilitating freeze to hiring, travel, meetings, and communication. This freeze includes reviewing and approving critical biomedical research on cancer treatment, heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and other public health concerns.

While administrators and faculty members may have to comply with legislation and court orders, even where these run counter to our values and to professional and constitutional principles, we are free to register our disagreement. Under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands.