Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Reposted by Joey Fishkin

Ted McCormick @tedmccormick.bsky.social · 1h

Shared courtesy of my Penn History colleague, Ben Nathans

Image: A variation on Benjamin Franklin’s “Join, or Die” engraving, originally published in the Pennsylvania Gazette in 1754. Each segment of the snake has the name of a university sent Trump’s “compact”: Texas, AZ, Vanderbilt, USC, Dartmouth, UVA, Brown, Penn, MIT.

7 200 640

Reposted by Joey Fishkin

Sherrilyn Ifill @sifill.bsky.social · 1d

Important piece by Prof. Kate Andrias. This is why treating SCOTUS as the only word on the Constitution gives away our power as citizens.

As I frequently say “we are founders and framers” of the next iteration of democracy in this country.
GIFT LINK
www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o...

Opinion | The Constitution Doesn’t Belong to Trump or the Supreme Court

www.nytimes.com

29 280 710

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Yes.

Interestingly the compact doesn’t even include any promises by the government so there aren’t promises to break.

But if you sign, you’re agreeing to give the government more leverage to take things from you they can’t take now.

2 5

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Really interesting point and clearly true.

If political science can't account for this it might be time to call in the sociologists!

Meanwhile we lawyers can ponder why the same forces of role morality / self-image / whatever among district judges don't seem to apply to SCOTUS judges.

2 1 8

Reposted by Joey Fishkin

Jake Grumbach @jakemgrumbach.bsky.social · 1d

District court judges, appointed by presidents from Reagan to Biden (including Trump I), seem to understand the assignment more than most law firms. This is curious because the data shows that lawyers as a whole are more liberal on average than federal judges

Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d

Perry asks directly whether the feds started the alleged violence in Chicago.

She asks whether it matters if the inability to execute the law was "caused by the federal agents."

Hamilton: "No, your honor."

17 38 280

Reposted by Joey Fishkin

Blake Emerson @blakeprof.bsky.social · 1d

This wolf comes as a wolf

1 6

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

And I have a thread about Marc Rowan’s effort to defend the compact he seems to have largely instigated (in the NYT’s opinion pages)—

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

The NYT's news pages did a solid job of covering the role of billionaire Marc Rowan in concocting the incredibly dangerous "compact" by which the Trump administration proposes to take over American universities.

But the opinion pages invited Marc Rowan to offer a rather wolflike defense. A brief 🧵—

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 7d

The Times' coverage of Rowan's role has been remarkable. It is sad to me that after forcing his alma mater, Penn, to oust a really good president for incredibly poor reasons, Rowan's megalomanical next thought was "maybe the federal government should do this everywhere" and they're actually trying.

1 3

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

@walterolson.bsky.social at the Cato Institute emphasizes the same thing that struck me so much: the enforcement mechanism in this compact. He calls it a "retroactive push-button guillotine."

(The DOJ is standing there at the button; the university is the one whose neck is below the guillotine.)

Walter Olson @walterolson.bsky.social · 1d

New from me at Cato: I go through the numerous and massive First Amendment and academic-freedom violations of Trump's proffered "compact" with universities and then talk about the mechanism by which it would be enforced, by way of what I describe as a "retroactive push-button guillotine."

Universities Must Defend Their Independence by Rejecting Trump's "Compact"

The Trump administration has proffered a “compact” to universities that would require them to surrender their independence and academic freedom. How many First Amendment violations can we identify in ...

www.cato.org

1 9 11

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Updates to this thread:

Eugene Volokh emphasizes that even when the federal gov't is allowed to require that *its grants* not be used to express a particular message or viewpoint, it can't constitutionally tell universitites what viewpoints to enforce w/*their own* funds raised elsewhere.

The Proposed "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education" and the First Amendment

[1.] There's a lot going on in the Trump Administration's proposed "Compact," and there's a lot that we might want…

reason.com

1 1 2

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Ok, enough for now. I have a longer post on the specifics of the compact itself which is at the link below.

As for Marc Rowan, I hope his defensiveness is a sign that he knows this isn't working quite as planned.

Thank you President Sally Kornbluth @mit.edu.

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 7d

I thought I'd put the administration's proposed "compact" with universities in context, so I wrote the blog post below.

It's especially for journalists covering this story!

Many details about how the compact itself works and why the administration has retreated to this strategy.

Balkinization: The Art of Replacing the Law with the Deal

A group blog on constitutional law, theory, and politics

balkin.blogspot.com

2 4

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

In other words, nice university you've got there, it would be a real shame if anything happened to it.

But the federal government cannot fight all universities at once.

It's trying for snowballing agreement. But it risks snowballing defiance.

That is why MIT's move today was so inspiring—

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

@mit.edu has done an incredibly important service to the nation by being willing to be the first school to reject the administration's "compact."

President Kornbluth focuses—and she's right—on the principle that "scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone."

The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.

1 5 17

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

But the real tell in my view is that Marc Rowan cannot resist bearing his fangs by saying—twice—what the compact itself tried to be slightly coy about: If you don't agree, we will destroy your university by depriving it of all federal "funds" (including student loans, 501(c)(3) status, etc.)

1 1 4

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

There's a lot of defensiveness in parts of the column, which is a good sign. This guy 100% gets that the compact is landing like a lead balloon and that absolutely nobody believes it advances "academic freedom" (which again, didn't even make Rowan's list of platitudes).

1 1 8

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

That is why I describe this column as wolfish.

It's written by a guy who is used to throwing his billions around and getting his way at Penn. The plan now is for the federal government to act the same way, as the world's most demanding and obnoxious university donor, who wants total control.

1 1 9

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

If your university will not remake itself in Marc Rowan & May Mailman's preferred image, it can expect a complete shutoff of "federal funds."

To emphasize the point Rowan says it again: "THEY NEED NOT ACCEPT FEDERAL FUNDING"

I hope this will put to rest the credulous "carrot not stick" narrative.

No school will be forced to adhere to the compact’s principles of fairness, civility, neutrality and transparency. If schools do not want to be accountable to these requirements, they need not accept federal funding.

1 4 12

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

But there is one thing I will give Marc Rowan and it is this.

Unlike the compact itself, which is just subtle enough about the point to successfully dupe many journalists, Marc says straightforwardly that the plan is to require universities to sign "*BEFORE* providing them with public funds."

These are not politically partisan requirements. It is eminently reasonable for the government to expect all this of schools before providing them with public funds.

1 1 3

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Also surprisingly absent from Marc Rowan's list of platitudes is viewpoint diversity.

Such a disappointment, Marc!

You're not going to try to defend the part where you demand such "diversity" (we all know what it means) in every academic "field, department, school, and teaching unit"?

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 10d

The university needs a "broad spectrum of viewpoints"—which the DOJ will obviously enforce as HIRE MORE CONSERVATIVES—not only in the university as a whole, but "within every field,
department, school, and teaching unit."

In other words, hire right-wingers in anthropology, Af-Am Studies, art, etc.

Signatories commit to rigorous, good faith, empirical assessment of a broad spectrum of viewpoints
among faculty, students, and staff at all levels and to sharing the results of such assessments with the public;
and to seek such a broad spectrum of viewpoints not just in the university as a whole, but within every field,
department, school, and teaching unit

1 2

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

But the most striking thing to me about Marc Rowan's list is what he doesn't even try to defend.

Would it have been so hard to include the platitude about "protecting academic freedom" that is in the compact text?

Maybe it's too obvious a ruse. (It's about protecting "conservative ideas" only—)

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 10d

The core contradictions are right there on the surface. Universities need to adopt strong policies "protecting academic freedom"—and must at the same time blatantly violate such policies by "transforming or abolishing institutional units" that so much as "belittle" "conservative ideas."

A vibrant marketplace of ideas requires an intellectually open campus environment, with
a broad spectrum of ideological viewpoints present and no single ideology dominant, both along political
and other relevant lines. Signatories commit themselves to revising governance structures as necessary to
create such an environment, including but not limited to transforming or abolishing institutional units that
purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas. Given the importance of
academic freedom to the marketplace of ideas, signatories shall adopt a policy protecting academic freedom
in classrooms, teaching, research, and scholarship.

1 5

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

"encouraging all members of the community to speak out and debate in their personal capacities" sounds downright free-speech-ish

So weird that the actual compact this guy helped write aims to force universities to punish any speech that supports whatever DOJ decides counts as "antifa"—

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 10d

Universities must protect "free speech" but at the same time must prohibit "support for entities designated by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations."

This is an unsubtle way to give legal effect to the government's designation of "Antifa" as a "domestic terrorist organization."

While universities should protect debate and academic freedom, harassment falls outside
permissible bounds. Signatories shall adopt policies prohibiting incitement to violence, including calls for
murder or genocide or support for entities designated by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations.

1 3

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

For instance: "prohibiting discrimination, harassment and intimidation of students" is an important thing we do at universities.

Would you glean from this summary that the actual compact includes the university agreeing to take the maximalist anti-trans position that trans students do not exist?

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 10d

Universities must adopt the govt's definition of "male," "female," "woman," and "man" that (clumsily, but the meaning is obvious enough) prohibits recognition of transgender students' existence.

The previous sentence is about women's sports. But the reach of the imposed definition is unbounded.

Institutions commit to defining
and otherwise interpreting “male,” “female,
” “woman,” and “man” according to reproductive function and
biological processes.

1 2 5

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Here's a semicolon-delineated list of platitudes, most of which are important pillars of what all universities already do, and none of which sound at all like they would include the specifics written into the compact itself that make them into stalking horses for undermining the university.

agreeing to a few common-sense policies laid out in the compact.
Editors’ Picks

A Debate About A.I. Plays Out on the Subway Walls

Out of This World Fashion for Life on Earth

Help! We Found a Hidden Camera in the Bathroom of Our Airbnb.
These include: selecting students and faculty members based on individual merit instead of group characteristics; holding the line against grade inflation; providing transparency to students about the economic potential of the academic programs on offer; prohibiting discrimination, harassment and intimidation of students; neutrally enforcing “time, place and manner” guidelines for protest activities; refraining from taking institutional positions on political controversies unrelated to a school’s core mission, while encouraging all members of the community to speak out and debate in their personal capacities; reporting and following all applicable rules on foreign contributions; and enrolling and educating primarily American students, so that schools remain U.S. institutions with foreign diversity instead of becoming global institutions that happen to be based in the United States.

1 1 7

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Here's a link.

Every defender of this compact does two things: (1) emphasize the platitudes universities agree with, and hide the land mines; and (2) de-emphasize the incredible power the compact would grant the DOJ over universities.

Rowan tries both, but can't quite make himself do (2).

Opinion | Academia Is Broken. Trump’s University ‘Compact’ Can Help Fix It.

www.nytimes.com

1 2 3

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

The NYT's news pages did a solid job of covering the role of billionaire Marc Rowan in concocting the incredibly dangerous "compact" by which the Trump administration proposes to take over American universities.

But the opinion pages invited Marc Rowan to offer a rather wolflike defense. A brief 🧵—

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 7d

The Times' coverage of Rowan's role has been remarkable. It is sad to me that after forcing his alma mater, Penn, to oust a really good president for incredibly poor reasons, Rowan's megalomanical next thought was "maybe the federal government should do this everywhere" and they're actually trying.

The Billionaire Behind Trump’s Deal for Universities

www.nytimes.com

2 18 43

Joey Fishkin @fishkin.bsky.social · 1d

Thank you, Senator!

Reposted by Joey Fishkin

Senator Scott Wiener @scottwiener.bsky.social · 2d

MAJOR NEWS: @GavinNewsom signed SB 79, my bill allowing more housing near public transit — rail, subway, rapid bus.

It’s a huge step for housing in California. It’ll create more homes, strengthen our transit systems & reduce traffic & carbon emissions.

Thank you, Governor!

88 640 3.7K