US universities were bracing for an uncomfortable four years ahead after Donald Trump was swept back to the White House in a historic presidential election.
Mr Trump defeated Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival, telling crowds at his campaign headquarters in Florida that US voters had given him “an unprecedented and powerful mandate”.
Speaking to Times Higher Education before election day, one university leader described the prospect of a second Trump term as “horrific for higher education”.
It was unclear how supportive Mr Trump is of the controversial Project 2025 policy playbook crafted by his allies at a conservative thinktank, which advocates the shuttering of the Department of Education, but Patricia McGuire, president of Trinity Washington University, said it “spells out a clear desire to debilitate if not demolish many universities”.
“If Project 2025 does indeed provide a blueprint, it will be about stifling academic freedom, more privatisation of student loan services, and taking higher education, through state and community colleges, out of the reach of less wealthy Americans,” Mark Shanahan, associate professor of political engagement at the University of Surrey, told THE after Mr Trump’s victory was confirmed.
He added that a second Trump administration could lead to increased attacks on free speech in higher education, particularly if both the Senate and House are controlled by the Republicans.
This echoed Professor McGuire’s predictions of “a ratcheting-up of public show trials of presidents and trustees even more egregious than the hearing that brought down president [Claudine] Gay of Harvard” amid campus protests of over Israel’s war in Gaza, plus an emboldening of politicians in states such as Florida and Texas, who have pushed restrictions on academic freedom, bans on diversity initiatives and reviews of curricula.
Ursula Hackett, reader in politics at Royal Holloway, University of London, said well-funded and networked conservative groups that laid the institutional foundations for Mr Trump’s victory have offered detailed plans to dismantle the Department of Education.
“Most likely, we’ll see the relaxation of regulations on for-profit colleges, and the elimination of [outgoing president Joe] Biden’s signature initiatives to support students of colour, LGBT students, and student loan forgiveness.”
Student voters had been tipped to play a key role in any success for Ms Harris but enthusiasm for the serving vice-president may have been tempered by continuing anger over the Gaza conflict.
Dr Shanahan said a significant majority of students had backed the vice-president, but too often Democratic votes were concentrated in the wrong places.
“It's likely that too few students came out to vote at all, or they voted either in the college state or their home state where their individual vote had less impact in swingling the election,” he said.
As results filtered in, the mood soon soured at Ms Harris’ election night watch party at her alma mater, Howard University in Washington DC.
Ravi Perry, a political science professor, told Inside Higher Ed that “higher ed hangs in the balance” but that the community at Howard – a historically black institution – would confront the future together.
“Howard is resilient,” Professor Perry said. “Howard is where black legends of all kinds have come…[The] names are endless. Kamala Harris is one of those legendary names. The campus will go on with our heads held high.”
With exit polls showing college graduates leaning by 57 per cent to 41 per cent for Ms Harris and those without a college degree backing Mr Trump by 54 per cent to 44 per cent, Dr Hackett said the diploma divide was now an “enormous” gap between the parties.
“It’s part of a sorting process that has grown with partisan polarisation - but it’s been supercharged by the Trump presidency and candidacy,” she said.
She said Mr Trump’s attacks on people with advanced degrees, his embrace of anti-intellectualism and ethnonationalism, and his vice-president-elect J.D. Vance’s references to professors as “the enemy” have contributed to this effect.
“Non-college educated America won,” said Dr Shanahan. “It is more populous and much more likely to align with Trump. Harris is seen as an elite insider, and like [2016 Democratic nominee Hillary] Clinton before her, failed to capture the less-educated and less politically-interested vote.”
Universities around the globe will have been watching the election results closely, with one eye on the possible implications for international student flows, on which the US fell behind during Mr Trump’s first term between 2016 and 2020.
Mr Trump’s return to power could also bring greater scrutiny of ethnic Chinese scientists and research ties with the Asian superpower, a key focus of Republicans during his first term.
Mr Trump’s anti-education rhetoric will be a cause for concern for the sector, as will be any policies against immigration, according to Zhamilya Mukasheva, a fellow in the School of Public Policy at the London School of Economics.
Dr Mukasheva said affordability has also been on the forefront of the debate around higher education.
“For those who are concerned, for instance, about what Trump’s win means for financial aid to students, the conventional wisdom in political science is that governments find it punishingly difficult to cut back on salient and popular areas of public spending.”
