University President Ronald J. Daniels, in his capacity as Association of American Universities (AAU) chair, worked with President Donald J. Trump and three other university presidents to create a new framework for higher education, which was released on August 3, 2026. The document is formatted as a call to action to define for university presidents and leaders to redefine their individual missions.
In an interview with The Chronicle of Higher Education, Daniels described his involvement in the framework as an opportunity to provide feedback to the Trump administration’s improved effort to address what they identified as preexisting problems in higher education. Daniels and the AAU have not officially endorsed the framework.
The new framework was released by U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon on August 3. It followed a compact earlier this year that offered prioritized research funding to the nine listed institutions that agreed to the conditions. The compact was rejected by seven out of the nine universities it targeted and was overwhelmingly criticized as an overstep of the government in education. The new framework is seen as an amended and less aggressive version of the compact.
The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) released an admonition of Daniels, the other university presidents involved in the statement and the AAU itself. A member of the Hopkins AAUP Chapter leadership voiced their concerns about the content of the framework in an interview with The News-Letter.
“[The framework] is just another attempt of the federal government to control how higher education functions and to put it under a series of political tests.. It significantly threatens academic freedom, the capacity of people to do their work, and the capacity of institutions to function independently and to conduct the kind of research that we’re [currently] doing.” the AAUP leadership team member said.
Additionally, the Hopkins AAUP Chapter leader described the manner in which Hopkins faculty and members of the AAU found out about Daniels’ involvement in the framework.
“We were particularly concerned when we learned that President Daniels played a role in drafting this compact, and that this happened without any consultation or conversations with faculty,” the AAUP leadership team member remarked. “We continue to believe that this is something that, regardless of the types of pressure that the Federal government puts on university administrations, Hopkins needs to stand firm in support of principles of shared governance… [The Trump administration] creates, sometimes, a false sense of urgency, and it is the role of university administrations to resist this and to insist on due process, because that's really the most important thing.”
The Hopkins AUUP Chapter leader referenced Daniels’ book, What Universities Owe Democracy.
“President Daniels wrote a book about what universities owe democracy, and that democracy needs universities. And we also believe that universities need democracy within. We need to stand firm to ensure shared governance in consultation with faculty and academic freedom,” they discussed.
In addition to faculty response, representatives within the Student Government Association (SGA) brought the issue to the attention of the senate and executive at its fourth general body meeting on September 15. Jackson Morris, the Disability Caucus Senator and Chair of the Committee on Civic Engagement, gave a presentation on the framework as well as Daniels’ response. His presentation brought Daniels’ statements to the attention of SGA to determine what the organization’s response should be and how the issue should be effectively communicated to students.
In an interview with The News-Letter, Morris discussed his motivation for giving a presentation at the meeting and highlighted the importance of spreading awareness about administrative actions.
“The reason I did this is because I want to get it in front of students. I want students to know that [as] student government…we act as your representatives,” said Morris.
The News-Letter examined the contents of the framework in regards to previous actions or statements by Daniels and events that have happened under his leadership. The following bolded sections are taken directly from McMahon’s framework and were chosen due to their relevance to Hopkins history and current events.
“Every prospective student is legally entitled to equal treatment regardless of protected characteristics, and credible accusations of covert attempts to evade the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will persist as long as admissions criteria remain shielded from public view.”
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) overruled Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), effectively overturning affirmative action. This court decision is especially relevant to Hopkins which immediately saw significant drops in the admittance of underrepresented groups for the Class of 2028, the first admission cycle following the 2023 ruling.
In 2024, the University’s undergraduate students and cultural affinity groups expressed discontent about Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. Some called on the university to strengthen their commitment to creating a diverse campus. Daniels and former Provost Ray Jayawardhana responded to the judicial change with similar sentiment in a message to the university community on September 19, 2024:
"Last summer, when the Supreme Court issued its decision to restrict the use of race and ethnicity in college admissions, we shared our concerns that the change would be a significant setback in the progress we have made in building a university community that represents the extraordinary diversity of talented students across America," Daniels and Jayawardhana wrote. "The impact of the ruling on racial and ethnic diversity in this admissions cycle is profoundly disappointing."
Daniel’s original disappointment in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard is not reflected in the framework to which he contributed.
“How will your institution encourage intellectual pluralism in all its academic units? And how will your school ensure the research enterprise is dedicated to advancing knowledge, deepening understanding, and serving the American people who fund it?”
This section focuses on protecting free speech, promoting debate and encouraging open-mindedness. Additionally, it specifically calls for the promotion of intellectual pluralism, a phrase that has come to connote the increase of conservative representation.
This sentiment is much aligned with Daniels’ history of thought. Daniels’ argument in his book What Universities Owe Democracy, the mission of Hopkins’ developing School of Government and the founding principles of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Agora institute all focus on increasing “viewpoint diversity.” Last year, Johnnie Moore, a conservative evangelical leader who served under Trump as the Executive Chairman of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, received a visiting fellowship with the SNF Agora Institute. The controversial appointment created student backlash and culminated in a protest during an SGA meeting.
Another example of the University’s efforts to increase intellectual pluralism under Daniels includes a partnership with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). The AEI is a right-wing think tank known for its support of limited government and democratic capitalism. The AEI has historically aligned itself with republican candidates, but has been critical of Trump since his impeachments. Critics of the AEI argue that corporate funding from companies like ExxonMobil and the Koch brothers creates a biased structure for research development and policy agendas. Research controversies include the support of scholarly work that encouraged racialized perceptions of intelligence and climate change denial.
“And how will you guarantee that unruly and violent protestors do not harass students or disrupt classes, research, public lectures, and campus operations?”
Although the framework emphasizes the importance of political diversity in discussion, it strongly warns against the effects of “unruly and violent” protest. Peaceful protests and demonstrations are not addressed throughout the piece. Daniels has had a contentious history with campus protests throughout his presidency.
In 2019, Hopkins affiliates and members of the Baltimore community staged a sit-in in Garland Hall, a main administrative building of campus. The protestors chained themselves to the inside of the building for over a month in protest of the creation of the Johns Hopkins Police Department (JHPD). The JHPD was created despite significant opposition from students, faculty and Baltimore residents and remains highly criticized. The sit-in, disruptive but ultimately peaceful, was deemed a safety concern by Hopkins administration and was forcibly dismantled by approximately 80 Baltimore Police Department officers.
In 2024, Hopkins joined several other universities in demonstrations of solidarity for Palestinian liberation. The second encampment, following what protestors deemed failed negotiations, lasted 12 days. Protestors willingly disbanded after negotiations resulted in the University's promise to accelerate its process of divestment.
At the “Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya Liberated Zone” encampment in May 2025 protestors demanded that Hopkins cut ties with Israel, abolish the JHPD and keep Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) off campus. Unlike the 2024 encampment, when the JHPD was not yet active, this encampment was forcibly dismantled by the JHPD. Encampment members alleged that JHPD officers violated their code of conduct by causing injuries to students.
“University leaders must ensure that the research enterprise is oriented toward advancing the U.S. national interest—not our adversaries…American universities must put Americans, and American interests first.”
This sentiment lays at the root of McMahon’s framework: a recommitment to U.S. nationalism. The statement’s premise seems to be radically opposed to the University’s reputation as a leading institution on international public health. The Hopkins mission statement explicitly states that affiliates are meant to use research to “bring the benefits of discovery to the world,” not to the U.S. alone.
Additionally, Hopkins has a higher percentage of international undergraduate students than most U.S. universities at approximately 15%. Combining undergraduate and graduate populations, the university’s international student population reached 39% in 2023.
The statement comes amid increased anxieties about immigration regulation, confusion about ICE jurisdictions and the possibility of detainment, especially for international students.
In an interview with The News-Letter, the leader of the Hopkins AAUP Chapter described the insidious components of the framework.
“This [framework] includes, for example, threats to international students under the chauvinistic language of ‘America First,’ as if there is a contradiction between teaching American students and American researchers and international students and researchers,” the AAUP Chapter leader said.
Conclusion
Other sections of the framework focus on the use of artificial intelligence in higher education, preparing students for the work force and making college affordable. These components were deemed more palatable by the leader of the Hopkins AAUP Chapter Leadership. While recognizing this, they also expressed sympathy for the difficult position Daniels is in.
“We do understand that many other universities, and Hopkins in particular, because of its reliance on federal funding, is most certainly very vulnerable, and that we are in the middle of a financial crisis. But universities have survived previous financial crises. We will weather this,” they said. “But if in the process we lose what the University stands for, we lose our academic freedom, we lose our ability to run a democratic institution, we become subject to the whims of whoever sits in the White House, who controls Congress, Democrat or Republican, it doesn't matter. What has survived? What is our legacy?”
In an email interview with The News-Letter, Francois Furstenberg, Director of Undergraduate Studies for the History department, described his belief that Daniels had failed to stand up for the university.
“The first thing to say is how dismaying it is – how demoralizing it is to watch our university president kneel down as Donald Trump’s administration works to seize control of the country’s great research universities,” Furstenberg said.
Additionally, Furstenberg describes his issues with the university administration as being reflective of issues of the nation's political state.
“But after seventeen years in power, President Daniels has successfully consolidated his control over large parts of the university, while dismantling powerful faculty bodies that had existed since the university’s founding,” Furstenberg added. “Authoritarianism is no better at the university level than it is at the national level. And none of us should be surprised to see its outcomes look so similar.”
On Tuesday, September 15 Daniels released a Johns Hopkins Broadcast email calling for input on the University’s response to the framework. In this message, he emphasized the importance of working with the Johns Hopkins University Council and receiving student input on the University’s response to the framework. The message includes a feedback form that is featured on the Provost’s website. The University plans to release a full draft of its response by mid-October. Hopkins affiliates will be able to leave comments on this draft.
Morris emphasized the importance of such documented proof regarding student voices about the reaction to Daniels’ involvement and the final draft of the University’s response.
“We have to make sure that there is evidence that student opinions were considered and that student opinions appear in the final version of the letter,” Morris said.
Henry Serringer contributed to the reporting of this article, specifically regarding the interview with the SGA representative Jackson Morris. Honora Muratori is a News & Features Editor for The News-Letter and Executive Secretary for SGA. She did not contribute to any reporting about SGA in this article.
Editor’s Note, September 15, 2026: The News-Letter reached out to the University for comments regarding this article but were unable to receive them before press time.
