Why Hiring Professors With Conservative Views Could Backfire on Conservatives
Many people think so. The Trump administration, in threatening to cut Harvard's federal funding, demanded that the university foster greater 'viewpoint diversity,' including by recruiting faculty members and students who would restore ideological balance to campus. Other political actors have embraced the idea, too. At least eight states have passed or introduced laws to require viewpoint diversity at public educational institutions.
Certainly, there is not enough engagement with conservative ideas on college campuses. Schools can and should do more to ensure that students encounter a greater range of political perspectives in syllabuses and among speakers invited to give talks.
But a policy of hiring professors and admitting students because they have conservative views would actually endanger the open-minded intellectual environment that proponents of viewpoint diversity say they want. By creating incentives for professors and students to have and maintain certain political positions, such a policy would discourage curiosity and reward narrowness of thought.
I am a philosophy professor whose views are, for the most part, politically progressive. When I teach the social contract — the theory that underpins many of our ideas about government and its justification — I assign the work of the philosopher Robert Nozick, one of the most prominent and effective defenders of libertarianism. I do so because I want my liberal students to be challenged and my libertarian students to think carefully about the arguments that support their position.
Mr. Nozick's own story helps show why hiring professors and admitting students for viewpoint diversity would be misguided. When he arrived at Princeton as a graduate student around 1960, he was a socialist. At Princeton he encountered the writings of the political economist Friedrich Hayek, a Nobel Prize-winning libertarian. In trying to argue against Hayek, Mr. Nozick found himself developing the ideas that would form the basis of his influential 1974 book, 'Anarchy, State, and Utopia,' which made a forceful case for a minimal state.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump makes academia face the damning truth about foreign students
Are American graduate schools still American? That's what President Donald Trump is asking as he takes action against Harvard University and its large international-student population. His effort to restrict Harvard's foreign-student visas seeks to address a growing problem in higher education: Many of our most renowned graduate schools are overwhelmingly non-American. Advertisement On Wednesday, Columbia University capitulated on the issue — agreeing in its deal with Trump to 'take steps to decrease financial dependence on international student enrollment.' The Ivy also promised to probe 'international student-applicants [on] their reasons for wishing to study in the United States' — in other words, to keep out the sneaky saboteurs coming here to wreak havoc. Significantly, Columbia's decision signals to other top-tier schools, Harvard in particular, that it's not worth fighting the administration over international-graduate-student enrollment. Advertisement And that is welcome news indeed. We support international educational exchange, as most Americans do. The problem is disproportionality: A huge influx of foreign students has changed the character of traditionally American institutions, leaving American students increasingly crowded out — and even making them targets of prejudice and discrimination. The numbers speak for themselves. Advertisement During the 2023-2024 academic year, the United States hosted 1.1 million international students, a sharp 7% increase from the year prior. Nearly half of them, 500,000-plus, were graduate students. International grad-school enrollments grew by 10.2% between 2021 and 2022, as American enrollments dropped by 4.7%. Some fields, mostly STEM-related, have seen a 100% international-student enrollment boom since the COVID-19 pandemic. Advertisement President Donald Trump listens during a briefing with the media, Friday, June 27, 2025, at the White House in Washington. AP At Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, for example, the percentage of international students rose from 56% in 2023 to 59% in 2024. At Carnegie Mellon University, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, Columbia and others, international students make up 48% or more of the graduate-student body. At MIT, it's 42%. As the foreign graduate population soared, so too did antisemitism and anti-Americanism on college campuses. Coincidence? We don't think so. One analysis found that once the international-student population surpasses 13% at a university, campus protests double. Advertisement Any reasonable observer of the post-Oct. 7 campus troubles must notice the heavy involvement of foreign graduate students like Mahmoud Khalil, who reportedly helped organize a campaign of intimidation at Columbia. Rather than trying to address the problem, schools like Harvard are fighting federal subpoenas seeking foreign students' disciplinary records — while simultaneously claiming the government has no proof their foreign students are a problem. Only intense pressure from Trump forced Columbia to confront the truth. But the problem is not just campus culture — there's strong evidence that international enrollment is shutting American students, particularly minorities, out of opportunities. Advertisement Harvard's Kennedy School saw a 50% drop in 'black or African American' enrollment in 2023 compared to 2021, while international enrollment rose. In addition, multiple scholarship opportunities at publicly funded colleges are open only to illegal-immigrant students, excluding those who are American-born. Demonstrators join the group Crimson Courage, who gathered to support Harvard University during a hearing before a federal judge at the federal courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., July 21, 2025. REUTERS Our Equal Protection Project has filed legal challenges to such programs at five schools (so far — there are many more), prompting the US Department of Education to open investigations into our cases. Advertisement And there's a hidden long-term cost to these disproportionate numbers of foreign students in America's graduate programs: brain drain. Most of the international students who gain higher-level degrees in American programs take their education and skills back to their home countries — talent and training lost to us domestically, because those spots could and should have been filled by Americans. Only about 30% of all international graduate students eventually seek green cards and legal permanent US residency. Advertisement And there's some evidence that those who do join the US workforce after graduation undercut their job-seeking American classmates — because employers can sponsor them for H-1B visas and hire them on the cheap. Most international students come here for good reasons, but their disproportionate representation has undeniably created negative consequences. Trump's effort to force schools to address the problem is a step in the right direction — and the Columbia deal shows academia that ignoring it is no longer an option. We love international students. But we also love the American character of our American universities — and don't want to see that lost. William A. Jacobson is a clinical professor of law at Cornell University and founder of the Equal Protection Project and where Kemberlee Kaye is operations and editorial director.
Time Magazine
2 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Is Donald Trump Named in the Epstein Files?
The Trump Administration has tried—and failed—to put tensions over its handling of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's case to bed for weeks. But they've only continued to escalate as news outlets have reported new information related to President Donald Trump's years-long relationship with Epstein and potential inclusion in files related to the case. The recent controversy ignited after the Department of Justice and FBI issued a memo earlier this month declaring Epstein's death a suicide and denying the existence of a 'client list' of people involved in his alleged sex trafficking activities. The memo contradicted a slew of conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein that have been particularly prominent on the right and had previously been fueled by top Trump Administration officials including FBI Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who in February stated that the rumored 'client list' was 'sitting on my desk right now.' (Following the memo's release, both have walked back their previous comments: Patel stated that 'the conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been,' and Bondi said that she was referring to the case file on Epstein in the February interview.) Trump himself brought the issue up more rarely than his allies, though he promised on the campaign trail to release more information related to the case. The Administration's reversal on the matter has drawn outcry from the President's MAGA base and divided the Republican Party, as constituent concerns and calls for transparency have clashed with Trump's repeated attempts to downplay the scandal. House Speaker Mike Johnson earlier this week prevented a vote on a bipartisan bill that would mandate the full release of the Epstein files—cosponsored by fellow Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna—by sending lawmakers home early for their five-week recess. A day later, the House Oversight Committee voted late Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice for its files related to Epstein's case. 'The American people deserve transparency and accountability and his victims deserve justice,' Rep. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, the top-ranking Democrat on the panel, wrote on X Wednesday. 'The wealthy and powerful are not above the law.' Three Republicans on the committee broke with their party to vote with Democrats on the matter. The committee also issued a subpoena for a deposition from Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's long-time associate who is currently serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking and other crimes. Here's what to know about the controversy and how the Administration is responding. White House hits back at reports that Trump is named in the files Questions about the Administration's handling of documents related to Epstein further mounted after the Wall Street Journal and other news outlets reported on Wednesday that Justice Department officials informed the President in May that his name is in the Epstein files. His inclusion in the records, which also include the names of other influential figures, isn't evidence of wrongdoing, according to the Journal's report. Trump's name has previously appeared in unsealed documents in the case, along with those of a number of other Epstein acquaintances and associates. Justice Department officials also reportedly informed Trump in the May briefing that they did not plan on releasing additional files related to Epstein because the material included child pornography and the personal information of victims. The Administration is pushing back on the reporting. White House communications director Steven Cheung referred to it as 'fake news' in a statement to TIME. 'The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep,' Cheung said. However, a Trump official told Reuters that the Administration is not denying that Trump's name was mentioned in the files. The Journal's most recent report comes as its parent companies, owner, two reporters, and one of the parent company's CEOs face a libel lawsuit filed by the President in response to an earlier story alleging that Trump was one of dozens of individuals who wrote letters to Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003. 'Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,' the letter concluded, according to the media outlet. TIME has not independently verified the reporting. On Wednesday, Rep. Khanna told MSNBC's 'The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell' that he planned on issuing a subpoena for the birthday album, which is in the possession of the Epstein estate. In the face of the escalating scandal, the Trump Administration has made some effort to release more files related to Epstein. On July 18, the Justice Department filed a motion asking for grand jury transcripts in the case to be released. A Florida federal judge this Wednesday blocked one of the Administration's requests to unseal grand jury testimony, citing regulations barring courts from unsealing such transcripts except in narrow circumstances. Two other requests for information filed by the Department in the state of New York are still being considered. What has Trump said about Epstein? Despite Trump's attempts to distance himself from Epstein since the disgraced financier's first conviction in 2008, the two were previously pictured together on numerous occasions—including at Trump's 1993 wedding to Marla Maples and at his Mar-a-Lago estate. In a 2002 interview with New York Magazine, Trump stated that he had known Epstein for around 15 years and referred to him as a 'terrific guy' and 'a lot of fun.' 'It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life,' the magazine quoted the President as saying. In 2017, however, the Trump Organization denied that the President had a relationship with Epstein or was aware of his conduct. 'This has all been reported countless times in the press,' Trump Organization attorney Alan Garten told POLITICO. The President has expressed ire at the media's focus on Epstein in recent weeks. 'I had the Greatest Six Months of any President in the History of our Country, and all the Fake News wants to talk about is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax!' Trump wrote on Truth Social Wednesday. What files have already been released on Epstein and is there a client list? Public pressure for the unsealing of files regarding the notorious sex offender is in part due to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign promise to release more information regarding the matter. Some previously sealed documents related to the Epstein and Maxwell cases have already been made public. In January 2024, more than 1,400 pages of records were unsealed under the Biden Administration, though they included little new information. This February, the Trump Justice Department released what it referred to as the 'first phase of the declassified Epstein files,' first to a group of right-wing influencers and later publicly. The information, however, was mostly already public, including flight logs and a redacted copy of Epstein's contact book. Trump is among other prominent figures named in the previously unsealed documents. He was mentioned in a 2016 deposition from Johanna Sjoberg, one of Epstein's victims, who said the disgraced financier's plane made an impromptu stop in Atlantic City in the 2000s. Sjoberg said 'no' when asked if she'd given Trump a massage. The FBI and DOJ have denied the existence of a 'client list' of people Epstein allegedly trafficked young girls to. They also said there is no credible evidence that Epstein blackmailed associates to keep them quiet. Why is the government meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell now? Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Tuesday that he intended to meet with Maxwell to discuss Epstein and what she knows about his actions. Blanche said he reached out at Bondi's request. 'President Trump has told us to release all credible evidence,' he said. 'If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say.' Maxwell's lawyer confirmed in a post on X that they were in contact with the government. The decision to speak with Maxwell, as well as the Department of Justice's request for grand jury testimony related to the Epstein to be unsealed on Friday, mark a shift in Bondi's approach to the issue as the Administration continues to take fire from its base and some Republican lawmakers and media figures.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Education Secretary Linda McMahon is ‘hoping' Harvard learns from Columbia's $200M settlement — but Jewish alumni say more work to be done
WASHINGTON — Education Secretary Linda McMahon said Thursday she's 'hoping' that Harvard University will get wise and drop a lawsuit against the Trump administration for stripping $2.6 billion in funds away over concerns about campus antisemitism. McMahon urged the Ivy League to think carefully after Columbia University caved and agreed to pay the administration $200 million in a historic settlement. 'We've had continuing negotiations and conversations with Harvard, even though there is a pending lawsuit that I think is going to, will play out, but we're hoping that Harvard will come to the table,' McMahon told NewsNation's 'Morning in America.' Advertisement 'We're already seeing other universities that are taking these measures before investigation or before our coming in to talk to them,' she added. 'That's why the monitors are in place and the Department of Justice — so that we can have a long-reaching legacy for universities to follow.' Some members of the Columbia community were less certain, with Jewish alumni Ari Shrage doubting the concessions would spur Harvard either way. 6 Education Secretary Linda McMahon said Thursday she's 'hoping' that Harvard University will get wise after Columbia caved in a historic $200 million settlement — and drop a lawsuit against the feds for stripping $2.6 billion in funds away. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement 'What they had on Columbia — they don't have on Harvard — is that Columbia's liquidity is very, very weak,' Shrage said, noting its immense endowment and the fact that its the largest private landowner and building owner in the Big apple. 'Harvard has a much more liquid portfolio, and they can wait out Trump, so they could just keep it in court and they could fund it. Columbia could not,' he added. 'And because of that, the Trump administration had the opportunity to force additional reforms. They just completely dropped the ball. Now the hard work begins and we look forward to being part of the process.' Shrage added: 'I think this is a good first step, but there's a lot more to do to rebuild trust with the Jewish community.' Advertisement The education secretary in her interview noted that Harvard had already made concessions by ousting members of its Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Cemal Kafadar and Rosie Bsheer, who sat on a panel that the university's former president, Larry Summers, said 'very likely' spewed antisemitic rhetoric. Harvard had also announced the closure of its diversity office on Wednesday, according to the Harvard Crimson. But the federal judge overseeing Trump's court battle with Harvard in a recent hearing expressed skepticism that the administration could make sweeping, 'ad hoc' decisions about withholding federal funds to leverage changes in university policies. On Thursday, Summers posted on X that Columbia's agreement with the Trump administration was 'an excellent template' for other universities and colleges. Advertisement 6 Some of Columbia's Jewish alumni were less certain, with grad Ari Shrage doubting the lackluster concessions would prompt Harvard to have a change of heart. James Keivom-Pool/New York Post 'First, academic freedom is preserved as the University maintains academic autonomy,' he explained. 'Second, ongoing reform with respect to anti Semitism, maintenance of order, promoting merit-based admissions and hiring, and strengthening the commitment to intellectual excellence is reinforced and a framework for further reform is established,' he continued. 'Third, normality is restored with a return to normal funding patterns, availability of visas for foreign students and removal of legal overhangs.' The former Ivy League president concluded that the settlement 'may be the best day higher education has had in the last year.' 6 To address safety concerns, Columbia agreed to work closer with the NYPD to prevent another repeat of the anti-Israel mob that took over Hamilton Hall in the spring 2024. rfaraino In addition to the settlement sum, Columbia will also be paying more than $20 million to its Jewish employees who were discriminated against amid antisemitic demonstrations that engulfed the Morningside Heights campus following Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. 'Numerous other Higher Education Institutions that have hurt so many, and been so unfair and unjust, and have wrongly spent federal money, much of it from our government, are upcoming,' Trump posted Wednesday on his Truth Social. Advertisement 'I look forward to watching them [Columbia] have a great future in our Country, maybe greater than ever before!' 6 The Ivy League university will now submit to independent monitoring to uproot antisemitism and ensure it is complying with merit-based hiring and admissions requirements. James Keivom The elite university will now submit to independent monitoring and mandatory reporting to the federal government to uproot antisemitism and ensure it is complying with merit-based hiring and admissions requirements. 'The settlement was carefully crafted to protect the values that define us and allow our essential research partnership with the federal government to get back on track,' said Columbia acting president Claire Shipman. 'Importantly, it safeguards our independence, a critical condition for academic excellence and scholarly exploration, work that is vital to the public interest.' Advertisement To address safety concerns for students, Columbia agreed to also maintain a trained security force to stop protests from invading academic spaces and work closer with the NYPD to prevent another repeat of the anti-Israel mob that took over Hamilton Hall in the spring 2024. 6 Demonstrators won't be able to wear masks, except facial coverings will still be allowed for medical and religious reasons. James Keivom Demonstrators won't be able to wear masks, though facial coverings will still be allowed for medical and religious reasons. 'This announcement is an important recognition of what Jewish students and their families have expressed with increasing urgency: antisemitism at Columbia is real, and it has had a tangible impact on Jewish students' sense of safety and belonging and, in turn, their civil rights,' said Brian Cohen, the executive director of Columbia and Barnard's Hillel chapter. Advertisement 'Acknowledging this fact is essential, and along with the new path laid out by the President and Trustees, I am hopeful that today's agreement marks the beginning of real, sustained change,' he added. 'This is not the end of the process, however it is a major step forward.' Shrage also said, 'I'm thrilled that the researchers got their funding back. They are doing lifesaving work. I only wish the university didn't drag this out so long and they could have gotten it sooner.' 6 'Our students must feel safe when they go to campus, and they should feel safe,' McMahon said Thursday. James Keivom Critics of the agreement have pointed to the differences between demands made by the Trump administration in April and the final product, including the loosened rules on the mask ban as well as the failure to punish more of the anti-Israel protesters who descended on campus in 2024. Advertisement The Trump administration had also previously asked for the University Judicial Board, which failed to discipline those students, to be abolished, but backed off in the final agreement. Others were dissatisfied that the university expressed no guilt for the state of affairs or that the Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies department wasn't placed under an academic receivership and will instead be put under review by a senior vice provost. McMahon said Thursday that the administration got 'the bulk of what we negotiated for.' 'Our students must feel safe when they go to campus, and they should feel safe,' she affirmed. 'The parents who are sending them there need to have assurance that their students will be protected, and we're not going to have these violent protests that we've seen.' The White House and Department of Education did not immediately return requests for comment.
