Rutgers University Senate has introduced a resolution urging the creation of a Mutual Academic Defense Compact (MADC) among the 18 member institutions of the Big Ten Academic Alliance. This move aims to protect academic freedom, institutional integrity, and the research enterprise across some of the nation’s leading public universities.

The resolution comes amid what university leaders describe as “recent and escalating politically motivated actions by governmental bodies” that threaten the core principles of American higher education. The document specifically cites concerns about attempts by the Trump administration and aligned political actors to undermine university autonomy, restrict scientific research, and suppress dissenting voices through legal, financial, and political means.

The Big Ten Academic Alliance, known for its athletic rivalry, also represents a powerful academic consortium, serving over 600,000 students and employing thousands of instructors. The resolution emphasizes that “the preservation of one institution’s integrity is the concern of all,” declaring that an attack on any single member will be treated as an attack on the entire alliance.

As of April 18, 2025, at least four Big Ten universities (Michigan State University, Indiana University Bloomington and University of Nebraska–Lincoln) have formally joined the resolution to establish a Mutual Academic Defense Compact (MADC). 

Faculty senate chairs at Ohio State and the University of Minnesota  have publicly stated that their bodies will consider the resolution soon. Additionally, Northwestern and Iowa have endorsed a related statement supporting academic freedom.

The Mutual Academic Defense Compact is designed to safeguard the foundational principles of higher education in the face of political or legal threats. Its main goals are:

• Establish a Shared Defense Fund: All participating universities commit meaningful funding to a collective pool. This fund is used to provide immediate and strategic support to any member institution facing direct political or legal infringement.
• Coordinate Unified Responses: Member universities agree to make available their legal counsel, governance experts, and public affairs offices to assist any institution under attack. This includes legal representation, countersuits, strategic communications, amicus briefs, expert testimony, legislative advocacy, and coalition-building.
• Protect Academic Freedom and Institutional Integrity: The compact is a direct response to politically motivated actions that threaten university autonomy, the integrity of scientific research, and free speech. It treats an attack on one member as an attack on all, ensuring a collective defense of academic values.
• Resist Unconstitutional Demands: The MADC aims to help institutions avoid capitulation to unconstitutional federal demands, mitigate funding cuts, and resist efforts to undermine diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, research, and funding.
• Support Vulnerable Campus Communities: The compact includes provisions for supporting non-citizen workers and other vulnerable groups, such as maintaining enrollment and stipends for students threatened by immigration actions and offering legal counsel and resources as needed.

By uniting, institutions can avoid capitulating to unconstitutional federal demands that threaten their budgets and missions. The compact enables member universities to file collective lawsuits, sell bonds, and open endowments to counteract or offset funding losses, providing a financial safety net for institutions targeted by federal or state actions.

The collective nature of the compact increases bargaining power with federal and state agencies. When universities act together, it becomes more difficult for external actors to “pick off” institutions one by one with funding threats. 

By defending academic freedom and institutional autonomy, the compact helps safeguard critical research funding, especially for programs that may be politically controversial (such as diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives). The compact also supports the preservation and advancement of these programs by providing legal and financial backing to resist efforts to eliminate or defund them.

The compact includes provisions for supporting international students and other vulnerable campus communities who may be affected by funding-related policy changes, such as visa cancellations or loss of stipends. By maintaining enrollment and financial support for these students, universities can minimize disruptions to their academic and research missions.

This development follows a week marked by a series of escalating threats directed at Harvard University, as the Trump administration intensified its campaign against the institution with demands for sweeping policy changes, threats to freeze billions in federal funding, and warnings that Harvard could lose its ability to admit international students or maintain its tax-exempt status.

On Friday, April 11, Harvard received an official email from the Trump administration’s antisemitism task force. The letter, signed by three senior federal officials and sent from the inbox of a top Department of Health and Human Services lawyer, outlined a series of far-reaching demands.

While the Trump Administration has not backed away from the email, it has claimed the letter was sent in error.

Harvard officials, who had been in contact with the task force in the weeks prior, were alarmed by the letter’s scope and immediacy. On Monday, Harvard publicly rejected the demands, asserting the university would not relinquish its independence or constitutional rights.

Despite the claim of error, the administration did not retract the letter’s content. Instead, White House officials maintained that the demands were justified and curiously criticized Harvard for not reaching out before going public. 

“It was malpractice on the side of Harvard’s lawyers not to pick up the phone and call the members of the antisemitism task force who they had been talking to for weeks,” Mailman said. “Instead, Harvard went on a victimhood campaign.”

Harvard, for its part, insisted it had no reason to doubt the seriousness or authenticity of the letter, given its official signatures and letterhead. 

The Trump administration announced the suspension of $2.2 billion in federal grants and contracts to Harvard and threatened to revoke the university’s tax-exempt status. The administration also warned of further consequences, including restrictions on Harvard’s ability to enroll international students.

As of Saturday, the White House continued to defend the substance of its demands, blaming Harvard for escalating the dispute by making the letter public and asserting that the university had exaggerated the situation rather than seeking direct communication.

Harvard, on the other hand, continues to focus on how the Trump administration’s actions will impact its community. 

“Recipients of such correspondence from the U.S. government—even when it contains sweeping demands that are astonishing in their overreach—do not question its authenticity or seriousness,” a statement from Harvard said, according to CNN.

“Harvard will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. It remains unclear to us exactly what, among the government’s recent words and deeds, were mistakes or what the government actually meant to do and say,” the statement added. “But even if the letter was a mistake, the actions the government took this week have real-life consequences on students, patients, employees, and the standing of American higher education in the world.”