Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The Shifting Landscape of Higher Education
Editor’s note: This article was first published in City Journal and on the author’s Substack.
Christopher Caldwell’s influential work, The Age of Entitlement, transformed discussions surrounding civil rights and education. The book asserts that the civil-rights framework established in the 1960s diverged significantly from America’s foundational constitutional principles. Caldwell contends that while the original aim was to eradicate racial discrimination, the Civil Rights Act and the ensuing bureaucratic apparatus inadvertently eroded essential liberties and facilitated the spread of left-wing racialist ideologies across various American institutions.
For decades, the Right’s response to Caldwell’s assertions remained ambivalent. Libertarians proposed repealing the Civil Rights Act, though this idea failed to gain traction due to widespread public approval of the Act. Meanwhile, establishment Republicans often concealed their true concerns, as they voted to expand civil-rights legislation and further entrap questionable notions like disparate-impact theory within legal frameworks.
However, the political landscape is now experiencing a notable shift. After a vigorous campaign against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, the Right has recognized that if a civil-rights framework is to exist, it must align with its principles. This emerging framework emphasizes colorblind equality rather than perpetuating racialist ideologies.
The Higher Education Battleground
Higher education has become a critical battleground in this ideological conflict. The Trump administration has specifically targeted Ivy League institutions, which not only promote leftist racial ideologies but also implement these ideologies as part of their administrative policies.
Ivy League leaders often present themselves as the custodians of the civil-rights movement. Paradoxically, they have become prominent advocates for practices that embody racial discrimination, such as stereotyping and segregation. Under the guise of a virtuous public image, these elite universities have embedded discriminatory practices into their operations, employing DEI policies that favor specific racial groups, and orchestrating racially segregated programs and housing.
In a decisive move, the Trump administration has disrupted this narrative. By issuing a series of letters to Ivy League presidents, it threatened to withdraw billions in federal funding due to violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and associated non-discrimination policies.
The administration’s argument is straightforward: racial discrimination is unjust—regardless of whom it targets. Institutions engaging in racial discrimination must remain ineligible for federal support.
Reactions and Resistance
This approach has sparked criticism, with detractors labeling it as
