On April 14, 2025, an article was published criticizing the Ivy League for its passive role in what is described as Donald Trump’s opposition to international students. The piece outlines the class divide in reaction to Trump’s policies, with elite institutions and powerful societal figures yielding to the Trump administration, while ordinary citizens form resistance movements.
Political scientist Jodi Dean commented on this trend, noting the decline of civil society institutions and an environment of submission. Dean cited Columbia University, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer among those who have capitulated to the administration’s pressures.
Contrarily, grassroots resistance is evident. Lawmakers, especially Republicans, are reportedly reluctant to attend town halls due to potential backlash from voters. Large protests have also taken place, opposing government overreach.
In education, when ICE targeted students at lower educational levels, they faced significant opposition from educators and local communities. Notably, a Sackets Harbor case involved community outcry leading to the release of a detained family. Federal agents in Los Angeles were denied access to pursue undocumented students.
In stark contrast, cases such as that of Kseniia Petrova, a researcher detained by ICE, highlight perceived inaction from Harvard University. The New York Times noted Harvard’s limited response, despite Petrova’s significant risk if deported to Russia. It was also observed that international colleagues hesitated to offer support due to fears concerning their own visa statuses.
This issue is prevalent, with many international students facing deportation risks for minor infractions. The affected educational climate is further exacerbated by Trump’s policies, which have led to termination of numerous student visas, sowing fear and uncertainty at universities nationwide.
The article argues that Trump’s stance threatens American higher education by deterring international talent critical to research and innovation. This, coupled with a lack of protest from top universities, undermines free speech and the founding principles of these institutions. Few exceptions exist, such as the proactive stance by Princeton’s president and legal actions from academic groups. The piece concludes with a call for accountability among American elites, asserting the need for a thorough reassessment following Trump’s potential electoral defeat.
