A federal judge on Friday ordered the Trump administration to stop its “coercive” threats against the University of California system, effectively stymieing the government’s efforts — at least for now — to wrest a $1.2-billion settlement from the University of California at Los Angeles and to deny its researchers millions of dollars in federal research support.
Judge Rita F. Lin’s sharply worded, 76-page preliminary injunction was a stunning reproach to the government’s efforts to reshape higher education by pressuring colleges to adopt Trump’s agenda, including eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and support for transgender students. It was also a huge initial win for the American Association of University Professors, the University of California’s faculty associations, and other plaintiffs who sued to stop tactics they said have chilled speech and threatened life-saving research.
The ruling “relieves the pressure on the University of California as they try to figure out a way to deal with the extortionary demands of the federal government,” said Anna Markowitz, an associate professor of education at UCLA and president of the executive board of the university’s faculty association.
“Agency officials, as well as the president and vice president,” wrote Lin, a judge with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in her ruling, “have repeatedly and publicly announced a playbook of initiating civil-rights investigations of preeminent universities to justify cutting off federal funding, with the goal of bringing universities to their knees and forcing them to change their ideological tune.”
“Universities are then presented with agreements to restore federal funding under which they must change what they teach, restrict student anonymity in protests, and endorse the administration’s view of gender, among other things. Defendants submit nothing to refute this.”
Lin specifically called out statements made by Leo Terrell, head of the Trump administration’s multiagency Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism as evidence of a government coercion campaign.
“Under Title VI, we’re taking away their money,” Lin quoted from an interview Terrell did with Fox News in March. “We’re going to bankrupt these universities. We’re going to take away every single federal dollar. That is why we are targeting these universities and we filed a notice of investigation to investigate the entire UC system in California.”
In a hearing last week, Abhishek Kambli, deputy associate attorney general, conceded that the task force wasn’t adhering to Title VI or Title IX rules in any of the cases so far where it’s reached financial settlements with universities, including Brown, Columbia, and Cornell. But he said its multiagency approach didn’t need to because it relies on “different authorities related to the terms of the grant and the policy priorities of the United States.” Lin disagreed.
A spokesman for the Department of Justice declined to comment on whether it will appeal the decision.
The government had also argued that the plaintiff’s case was too speculative to be heard because UCLA might not agree to the proposed conditions for restoring funding. Lin rejected that argument as well. Faculty members have stopped teaching or researching topics they’re afraid are too “left” or “woke” to avoid triggering funding cuts, she said.
In addition, “with every day that passes, UCLA continues to be denied the chance to win new grants, ratchetting up defendants’ pressure campaign,” Lin wrote. Even after Lin, in two separate orders in August and September, demanded that federal agencies restore the $584 million in funding they’d frozen for UCLA, the National Science Foundation has continued to deny UCLA researchers grants, the judge said, citing reports from numerous researchers there.
Connie K. Chan, a lawyer for the AAUP, said the decision “affirms the rights of faculty, students, and staff to stand up for their rights even when the university itself doesn’t.” The university was not a party to the suit and has resisted calls for it to file suit directly against the federal government, an option some fear could trigger further retaliation.
A UC system spokesman issued a statement Saturday saying that the system “remains focused on our vital work to drive innovation, advance medical breakthroughs, and strengthen the nation’s long-term competitiveness. UC remains committed to protecting the mission, governance, and academic freedom of the university.”
Update, Nov. 15, 6:05 p.m.: This story was updated to include comments from a UCLA faculty member and a lawyer for the plaintiff, as well as a statement from the UC system.
