Tag: universities

“UndocuGraduation” Ceremonies For Illegal Aliens Include Guidance On ICE Raids

This graduation season, three universities in California and a university in Washington will hold “UndocuGraduation” ceremonies to celebrate illegal immigrant students. 

Universities paired the event announcements with commitments to protect the identities of student attendees by not releasing any “data related to immigration status” unless presented with a “judicial warrant, subpoena, or court order,” according to a message on behalf of the California State University system. 

“Immigration enforcement is the responsibility of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, not the university,” a message from California State University Long Beach states. 

California State University, Longbeach (CSULB) will host a “Beyond Borders Graduation Celebration” for illegal immigrant students on May 10, according to a university webpage. 

California State University, Northridge (CSUN) will host an “UndocuGraduation” ceremony May 3, according to an Instagram post. 

“Join us at UndocuGraduation to honor your achievement as an undocumented, DACAmented, or mixed status graduating Matador,” the event page states. 

The event will be hosted by CSUN’s DREAM Center, which is part of the university’s student union and provides resources such as an “Immigration Preparedness Toolkit.”

CSUN is also instructing students to report “ICE sighting[s] on campus” and sharing guidelines explaining what to do if you are an illegal immigrant approached by immigration officers. 

The university is providing “red cards” that direct illegal immigrants on how to act if approached by law enforcement and instructing illegal immigrant students to “give the red card to the agent,” per a social media post. 

“Do not open the door…do not answer any questions…do not sign anything,” the red card reads. 

California State University, Fullerton (CSUF) will host an “Undocu Recognition Celebration” May 3.

Keep reading

Tennessee university hit with civil rights complaint over 17 race-based scholarships

Middle Tennessee State University is facing a federal civil rights complaint alleging it offers 17 scholarships that “discriminate based on race, color, and/or national origin.”

One example cited in the complaint is the Whitney Stegall scholarship, which states, “Preference will be given to students who are African-American or Native- American.”

“Racial and ethnic discrimination are wrong and unlawful no matter which race or ethnicity is targeted or benefits,” William Jacobson, founder of the Equal Protection Project, told The College Fix.

“All applicants are entitled to equal treatment without regard to race, color, or national origin,” the Cornell University law professor said in a recent interview.

The Equal Protection Project, which is part of the Legal Insurrection Foundation, filed the complaint earlier this month. EPP’s mission is to pursue “fair treatment of all persons without regard to race or ethnicity.”

When contacted by The Fix about the complaint, the university media relations office declined to comment.

Keep reading

A Top Antitrust Enforcer Is Open To Prosecuting People Who Disagree With Him

The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Mark Meador recently insinuated that his agency may investigate nonprofits and academic institutions that object to antitrust enforcement actions without disclosing their donors for deceptive practices. While Meador may think it’s OK to probe parties for disagreeing with him, the FTC’s consumer protection remit does not sanction prosecuting those who reject the commissioner’s antitrust ideology.

Meador recently reposted a video of him discussing the “academic whitewashing” of antitrust during an event hosted by American Compass and the Conservative Partnership Institute on May 1. (While no full recording of the event exists at press time, an employee of American Compass tells Reason that the clip is from the aforementioned event.)

Meador complains about academics “renting out their Ph.D. [and] their reputation to advocate for the interests of giant corporations.” He rightly acknowledged that people are free to do whatever they want but then said that the FTC brings “enforcement actions against influencers and reviewers who advocate for products without disclosing that they’re being paid for it.”

Meador wondered aloud whether nonprofit employees and academics who advocate “for the interests of certain corporations or mergers in their white papers and their op-eds without ever disclosing that they’re being paid to do so” may also be guilty of deceptive practices. He did not state that the FTC would bring enforcement actions against academics but said it’s “worth investigating.”

While Meador may think “it’s an interesting question” whether he may prosecute his ideological opponents, the Supreme Court has already provided an answer. Eugene Volokh, professor emeritus at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, understands the ruling in NAACP v. Alabama (1958) as holding that, “when it comes to speech that is neither commercial advertising for a product…nor specifically election-related, broader First Amendment precedents would indeed preclude such disclosure requirements.”

Nadine Strossen, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union and senior fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, tells Reason that “the Supreme Court has expressly distinguished between commercial and other communications.” Citing Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio (1985), Strossen says “compulsory disclosure regarding non-commercial expression is presumptively unconstitutional.”

Keep reading

The AI Epidemic On College Campuses Exposes How Broken Our Higher Education System Is

It’s no secret that higher education has been a mess for some time now. From DEI initiatives to seemingly never-ending protests to the skyrocketing college debt crisis to the ridiculous ideological imbalance amongst professors, our once hallowed institutions of higher learning are ripe for root-and-stem reform.

But just when it seemed that the American college experience couldn’t become any worse, artificial intelligence came roaring onto the scene. Now, instead of popping Adderall and Ritalin to power through finals like the good old days, college kids are now pawning their assignments off on AI.

This all comes as college professors (many at supposedly prestigious institutions) bemoan that their students either can’t be bothered to read normal college-level assignments or simply can’t because of their limited vocabulary and critical thinking skills. Even professors at notoriously leftist schools have had enough, venting their frustration at any left-of-center outlet that will listen.

These students are supposedly going to college for a particular area of study, meaning they theoretically want to learn about it. Yet they just pass on their assignments on to ChatGPT. How are they supposed to have jobs in STEM, or even subjects like literature, if they can’t even comprehend the material without AI?

If AI is producing all their work in college, isn’t it reasonable to assume that it will continue to be a crutch for them when they become chemists, lawyers, or even teachers themselves? Then the question becomes whether or not the student, given the (non)education he’s received, is worth hiring at all. AI can do it better.

Crib sheets, CliffsNotes, and stimulants are one thing, but relying on a machine to complete even simple assignments, and therefore forgoing any attempt to engage with the material, presents a looming competency crisis. Not only does it pose an existential danger to how our society and economy functions, it poses a threat to the broken diploma pipeline model embodied by today’s higher education system.

The solution to this epidemic seems rather obvious. Students may use AI as a research assistant, no different from Google Scholar, but submission of any assignment or essay that has a single sentence crafted by anything other than the student’s own mind should receive an immediate failing grade as well as a referral for expulsion. Some smaller schools, like my alma mater Washington and Lee University, already have an honor system in place that has the same expectations and penalties.

An even stricter move would be to heavily weight course grades toward in-class tests and essays done with pencil and paper with no devices allowed (besides maybe calculators for STEM classes).

Keep reading

‘New McCarthyism:’ Professors investigated by their own universities speak out

Nearly two dozen professors investigated by their universities are now sounding the alarm on what they say were essentially witch hunts against them for doing something that upset the campus status quo.

The recently published book “Professors Speak Out: The Truth About Campus Investigations” contains 20 personal vignettes authored by professors who argue that the probes were largely unnecessary and unfounded, in some cases malicious, and certainly biased against them.

The topics of the probes centered around three main issues: sex; race and ethnicity; and religion and politics.

Edited by Nicholas Wolfinger, a professor of family and consumer studies at the University of Utah, the book details the experiences of scholars who faced so-called kangaroo courts, and some were fired from their jobs.

“The book features conservatives attacked for their views, and progressives attacked for theirs. Other cases, such as mine, were essentially apolitical,” Wolfinger told The College Fix in an email interview.

Anyone concerned with cancel culture or academic freedom, or who’s been critical of the modern academy, should read the book, he said, adding administrators who want to improve their institutions should also get a copy.

Keep reading

‘There Are Chinese Spies At Stanford’: Bombshell Report Reveals CCP Student Espionage

Astudent newspaper at Stanford University dropped a bombshell report earlier this month revealing “there are Chinese spies at Stanford.”

The report, titled “Uncovering Chinese Academic Espionage at Stanford,” was published by The Stanford Review, an independent student-run newspaper. This alarming investigation is based on “over a dozen interviews conducted between July 2024 and April 2025, involving Stanford faculty members, current and former students, and independent experts specializing in Chinese intelligence operations and technology transfer.”

The report highlights three critical findings. First, it exposes that the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Ministry of State Security (MSS) is actively recruiting or coercing Chinese students and scholars at Stanford to serve as “non-traditional” intelligence assets. The MSS demands these individuals gather information that it deems valuable. Rather than targeting classified documents, the MSS is focused on obtaining “the know-how behind American innovation,” which encompasses “conclusions from Stanford research projects, methodologies, software, lab workflows, collaborative structures, and even communication channels.” The agency is particularly interested in information related to artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics.

Fears of Harassment, Losing Scholarships

The Stanford report underscores a critical nuance: not all Chinese students and scholars on campus are engaged in espionage for China. However, those who are involved often operate under vastly different motivations. While some choose to cooperate with the MSS voluntarily, others are unwitting victims of their government, acting out of fear, as highlighted by the Stanford Review. Reports indicate that some Chinese students feel pressured by MSS handlers in the U.S. who closely monitor their actions. The threat of repercussions, such as harassment of their family members back in China, looms large for these students.

Moreover, a pervasive fear of losing scholarships supplied by the Chinese government plays a significant role in this dynamic. The Stanford Review highlights the China Scholarship Council (CSC), a leading Chinese government agency that funds between 7 and 18 percent of Chinese students studying in the United States. Its sponsorship comes with stringent conditions: Students must align their research with state priorities, particularly those outlined in the government’s “Made-in-China 2025” industrial initiative. Furthermore, scholarship recipients must pass a loyalty test, pledge allegiance to the CCP, and agree to return to China upon completing their studies.

In addition, while studying in the U.S., the CSC mandates that sponsored students submit regular “situation reports” detailing their research to Chinese diplomatic missions, further emphasizing the controlling nature of this scholarship program. These students’ family members in China often serve as guarantors of these scholarships, and these guarantors will face financial penalties should their students “violate” the arrangement or refuse to go back to China.

Keep reading

Priorities at U. Rhode Island include hiring more ‘faculty, staff of color’

A goal in the University of Rhode Island’s “Strategic Plan 2023-2033” to “prioritize” hiring people “of color” is raising concerns about equal protection violations among civil rights experts.

The multi-part plan describes various priorities for the university over the decade-long period. Specifically, “Priority 3: Foster an Inclusive Culture” outlines ways the university intends to advance “anti-racist” and “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” efforts in faculty and leadership positions, according to the university website.

One of the goals of “Priority 3” expresses the university’s intentions to “enhance search and hiring processes to prioritize the recruitment, hiring, and retention of faculty and staff of color.”

Two outside civil rights and legal advocates told The College Fix that this practice could be a violation of the law.

“Prioritizing color over merit and qualifications sets a bad precedent that on its face can be discriminatory,” Linda Lee Tarver said as an ambassador of Project 21, an African-American civil rights initiative at the National Center for Public Policy Research.

Tarver, a former Michigan civil rights commissioner, told The Fix in a recent email that such practices undermine merit-based hiring.

Keep reading

Trump vows to end secrecy of foreign & CCP funding on campus after Biden ‘turned a blind eye’

President Donald Trump has vowed to “end the secrecy” surrounding foreign funding and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) influence at U.S. colleges and universities after the Biden administration “turned a blind eye” to the problem.

Trump said in a late April executive order that “it is the policy of my Administration to end the secrecy surrounding foreign funds in American educational institutions, protect the marketplace of ideas from propaganda sponsored by foreign governments, and safeguard America’s students and research from foreign exploitation.” 

The president ordered Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Attorney General Pam Bondi to enforce the federal laws surrounding the disclosure of foreign funding on U.S. campuses after Biden Education Secretary Miguel Cardona deprioritized the issue over the previous four years.

“During my first term, the Department of Education opened investigations on nineteen campuses from 2019-2021, which led universities to report $6.5 billion in previously undisclosed foreign funds,” Trump said in the April executive order. “Yet the prior administration undid this work, moving the Department of Education’s specialized investigatory work on foreign funds to a unit ill-equipped to perform it, undermining investigations, and hindering public access to information on foreign gifts and contracts.”

Keep reading

Trump Administration Launches Civil Rights Probe of Harvard’s Hiring Practices

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is investigating whether Harvard University unlawfully hires faculty based on race and sex, arguing that the school’s own data provides evidence of discrimination. The probe is the latest federal action against the beleaguered university, which last month sued the Trump administration over its decision to freeze more than $2 billion in aid to the Ivy League school.

In a document initiating the investigation, the EEOC cited materials on Harvard’s website—many of them now deleted—in which the school bragged about increasing the number of “women, non-binary, and/or people of color” on the faculty. The largest increase was in the share of non-white tenure-track faculty, which rose by 37 percent between 2013 and 2023.

The majority of those new hires, Harvard noted in a 2023 report, had been made in the past year.

White men, meanwhile, decreased dramatically as a share of tenure-track faculty, dropping from 46 percent in 2013 to 32 percent in 2023. Every other demographic for which Harvard collects data, including white women, rose over the same period.

Keep reading

Pope Leo Warns Over AI As MIT Researcher Finds 90% Probability Of ‘Existential Threat’

In his first formal audience as the newly elected pontiff, Pope Leo XIV identified artificial intelligence (AI) as one of the most critical matters facing humanity.

“In our own day,” Pope Leo declared, “the church offers everyone the treasury of its social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defense of human dignity, justice and labor.” He linked this statement to the legacy of his namesake Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum, which addressed workers’ rights and the moral dimensions of capitalism.

His remarks continued the direction charted by the late Pope Francis, who warned in his 2024 annual peace message that AI – lacking human values of compassion, mercy, morality and forgiveness – is too perilous to develop unchecked. Francis, who passed away on April 21, had called for an international treaty to regulate AI and insisted that the technology must remain “human-centric,” particularly in applications involving weapon systems or tools of governance.

Keep reading