In March, Tulane University renamed its Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion to the Office of Academic Excellence and Opportunity. University President Mike Fitts wrote in a statement that the name was changed to prevent federal funding cuts worth upwards of $320 million.  

According to Fitts, this money allows Tulane to “create better health outcomes, save lives, advance science and technology, create innovation and support economic development” and support its students financially. It makes sense that Tulane would do whatever it must to keep that funding secure.  

This move did not come without criticism. I wrote in The Hullabaloo that the decision signaled a willingness to capitulate to a growing authoritarian threat. This threat aims to “chill” speech and diminish First Amendment protections of certain speech. 

Tulane was not alone in quickly conceding to federal pressure. However, a few schools decided to put up a fight. Harvard was one of them.

The dizzying $2.6 billion in federal funding granted to Harvard frozen by the Trump administration, as of Sept. 3, was ordered unfrozen by United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs on First Amendment grounds.  

Burroughs stated in her order that “a review of the administrative record makes it difficult to conclude anything other than that Defendants [Trump administration] used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities, and did so in a way that runs afoul of the [Administrative Procedure Act], the First Amendment and Title VI.” 

It is clear, however, that while Harvard won this round, the legal battle may last far longer. The Trump administration plans to appeal the decision while actively delaying full compliance with it. Still, money is now slowly trickling back to Harvard for scientific research.  

As for Tulane, perhaps the calculation was correct that the millions of dollars in funding are not worth losing just to pursue a lengthy and costly legal battle. Litigation drains all parties involved of valuable time and resources. 

We are in unprecedented times. When constitutional rights that affect every single one of us are under attack, universities must resist. Lawyers, businesspeople, institutions and universities as centers of public trust must exercise their influence to protect all our rights.  

Tulane had options — the same ones Harvard did. Why could the university not have tried harder? Harvard has far more money on the line. Is the logic that I should expect less of my own school? I don’t think so. I firmly believe Tulane can do better and it still has time to join the fight.