The University of Arizona’s decision not to sign the Trump administration’s Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education as currently written has sparked strong reactions from students on both sides of the political spectrum.
The compact, which was sent to universities nationwide, called for eliminating race-based admissions, scaling back diversity programs and enforcing “viewpoint neutrality” in classrooms.
On Oct. 20, UA President Suresh Garimella announced the university would not sign the compact as written, instead issuing a separate Statement of Principles reaffirming the university’s independence and commitment to free speech.
For Victoria Watson, a sophomore studying political science and Middle Eastern studies, as well as the secretary of the College Democrats of Arizona, that cautious response didn’t go far enough.
“Higher education has been under attack constantly,” Watson said. “If you’ve been marginalized, our government needs to make up for that. This compact would erase that progress.”
Watson expressed that she was especially troubled by language in the compact limiting the consideration of race and identity in admissions. “As a first-generation woman and a Latina, I know firsthand how much these policies matter,” Watson said. “We can’t pretend everyone starts from the same place.”
Cooper Long, the College Democrats’ political affairs director, echoed her concerns, warning that the compact could erode academic freedom.
“I was worried about our ability to make our own decisions […], admissions, research, hiring,” Long said. “Universities should stand up for students and not bend to the will of a political administration.”
According to Long, he appreciated Garimella’s refusal to sign, but he hoped the administration would take a firmer stance in the future.
“I wish there was more clarity,” Long said. “We shouldn’t be pawns in a political game. Our education should be based on merit, not loyalty to an administration.”
While many progressive students condemned the compact, others defended it as a long-overdue correction.
In an Oct. 15 opinion column, Zaina Jasser viewed the compact as refreshing. Jasser argued that the Associated Students of the University of Arizona Student Body President, Adriana Grijalva, has not prioritized the thousands of conservative students waiting for action.
“Don’t be fooled, my UA student body president does not represent me,” Jasser wrote. “Her words of faith to represent the university community apply to only the voices in power, already unrepresentative.”
Jasser described the Higher Education Compact as an important step toward equal representation for conservative students.
“This is a long-awaited initiative […] to finally respect, bolster and represent conservative students as they do our liberal counterparts,” Jasser wrote. “It is fairness with incentive.”
Jasser also defended the compact’s limits on identity-based admissions and hiring practices, arguing that the policy promotes equity without discrimination.
“Eliminating identity-based rewards does not destroy the educational equity you deserve,” Jasser said. “Educational equity can exist separate from identity and a destruction of conservative ideas.”
Jasser ended her piece with a call for conversation and courage on campus.
“Where is the dialogue around protecting conservative voices?” Jasser asked. “The university must remain a place where I can share my opinions and arguments without fear of judgment.”
The clash between these perspectives mirrors a broader campus divide over how students should be prioritized. As the UA continues to navigate that balance, one thing is clear: students on both sides believe the future of academic freedom is at stake.
