The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) declined a recent offer by the Trump Administration that would tie federal funding to compliance with new higher‑education conditions. MIT’s leadership argued the proposal threatened institutional independence and free expression.
The administration’s proposal, sent to nine major universities, offered preferential federal grants and enhanced access in exchange for adopting policies including caps on international undergraduate enrollment, limits on tuition increases for U.S. students, and screening foreign student applicants on grounds of “hostility to the United States, its allies, or its values.”
MIT President Sally Kornbluth wrote to the U.S. Department of Education that the institute “cannot support the proposed approach” because it imposes constraints inconsistent with “independent thinking and open competition for excellence.” She emphasized that MIT competes on global scale without relying on special preferences.
Critics of the plan say it would allow political control over academic admissions, scholarship priorities, and campus policies. Supporters argue it imposes accountability and education reform. MIT’s refusal sets a precedent: universities may push back if federal incentives compromise core academic mission.
The decision also highlights tension between conservative-driven federal agendas and universities’ desire to preserve autonomy. MIT’s stance may embolden other institutions to reject conditional funding packages.
