Executive Orders and Their Impact on College Accreditation and Higher Education
President Donald Trump signed several executive orders impacting higher education, particularly concerning college accreditation, foreign influence, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. These orders, issued on April 23, 2025, aim to reshape the landscape of higher education by addressing issues ranging from accreditation standards to foreign funding transparency.
Accountability for Accreditors and "Unlawful Discrimination"
Executive Order 14279 (EO) directs the Secretary of Education (the “Secretary”) to “hold accountable” higher education accreditors that “engage in unlawful discrimination in accreditation-related activity under the guise of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ initiatives.” This order is rooted in the claim that some accreditors require schools to adopt unlawfully discriminatory practices related to DEI as a condition of accreditation. Accreditation, in this context, is the process through which an independent agency evaluates a school or program to ensure it meets specific educational standards recognized by the Department of Education (ED). Accreditation is crucial because federal financial aid, including Pell Grants and student loans, is typically disbursed to the school, which then applies the funds to tuition and other authorized charges before providing any remaining funds to the student.
The EO specifically targets accrediting bodies for law and medical schools, criticizing their accreditation standards that require schools to take steps to support diversity in their student bodies. For example, it criticizes the medical school accreditor for requiring schools to “engage[] in ongoing, systematic, and focused recruitment and retention activities, to achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes among its students.” In response, the EO directs the Attorney General and Secretary to “investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools” that is “advanced by the Council, including unlawful ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ requirements,” and to assess whether to suspend or terminate recognition of the Council. More broadly, the EO articulates “New Principles of Student-Oriented Accreditation” for any accrediting body recognized by ED.
This executive action follows a pattern of challenging DEI initiatives in educational institutions. A previous Dear Colleague Letter (February DCL), issued by the Department of Education on February 14, 2025, claimed that educational institutions had engaged in racial discrimination under the banner of DEI and directed schools to comply with the Department’s interpretation of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) or risk losing federal funding.
Legal Challenges and Interpretations
The EO has faced legal challenges, with potential arguments mirroring those used against the February DCL. For instance, the reasoning of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) v. Department of Education decision, which stayed the implementation of the February DCL, could be applied to block the EO. The AFT decision stated that the APA applies because the February DCL “effects a substantive change in existing law or policy” by imposing new legal obligations on regulated parties and impermissibly extends Title VI to cover classroom speech and curriculum.
Read also: Comprehensive Ranking: Women's College Basketball
The EO may also be challenged under the Fifth Amendment, similar to the NEA case, where the court concluded that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claims that the February DCL was unconstitutionally vague. The court noted that the February DCL did not clearly define “what the Department believes constitutes a DEI program, or the circumstances in which the Department believes DEI programs run afoul of Title VI” or “even define what a ‘DEI program’ is.”
The full scope of the executive order may remain unclear until federal agencies issue additional guidance. It is uncertain how DEI will be defined or what activities will be deemed to “violate the Nation’s civil rights laws.” The Department of Education issued initial guidance on DEI programs’ compliance with federal civil rights law on February 14, but it did not appear to clarify these issues. In addition, the provision requiring institutions to agree that their compliance with federal civil rights laws is a material condition of the grant or contract could expose private, nonprofit colleges or universities to broad liability and increased litigation.
Transparency Regarding Foreign Influence
Another significant executive order signed by President Trump addresses transparency regarding foreign influence at American universities. This order directs the Secretary of Education to work with the Attorney General to enforce requirements of Section 117 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act (P.L. 110-315) for complete and timely disclosure of foreign funding by higher education institutions. The House passed the Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions (DETERRENT) Act (H.R. 1048) on March 27, which would amend this same statute to enforce more stringent foreign gift reporting.
Reporting foreign gifts under Section 117 has been under scrutiny for many years. Under current law, the Attorney General, at the request of the Secretary of Education, can bring a civil suit against an institution to compel compliance with the reporting requirements. Legislation under consideration in Congress, like the DETERRENT Act, would have stricter enforcement mechanisms, including loss of Title IV federal student aid eligibility and criminal penalties for individuals on campus failing to comply with Section 117. The order increases the political pressure on institutions to comply with Section 117 reporting.
Support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
President Trump also signed an executive order titled, “White House Initiative to Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities.” This initiative seeks to elevate the nation’s HBCUs through private-sector partnerships, institutional development, and workforce preparation opportunities across sectors, including health care. The Initiative is also tasked with identifying ways to address barriers to HBCUs in accessing federal funding and improve HBCUs’ competitiveness for federal research and development funding.
Read also: Phoenix Suns' New Center
The purpose of the initiative is to increase the capacity of HBCUs to provide the highest-quality education to an increasing number of students. The initiative has two primary missions - increasing the private-sector role, including the role of private foundations, and enhancing HBCUs’ capabilities to serve students.
Broader Implications for Higher Education
Beyond the specific areas targeted, these executive orders signal a broader shift in federal oversight and priorities for higher education. For example, an executive order focuses on closing the Department of Education by directing the Secretary of Education to take steps to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law to return authority over education to the states. While not specified in the EO, Pell Grants and student loans have been publicly cited as examples of programs that will continue uninterrupted by any dismantling of the department, while other programs may be moved to other federal agencies. For example, federal student aid could move to the Treasury Department or the Small Business Administration, and the activities of the Office for Civil Rights could move to the Justice Department.
Another executive order requires all federal agencies to review contracts, grants, and loans for waste, fraud, and abuse in order to ensure spending transparency and federal employee accountability. Agencies are required to prioritize reviewing funds disbursed to educational institutions and foreign entities. The funding to be reviewed includes discretionary spending provided through federal contracts, grants, loans, and related instruments. The intent of the executive order is to reduce federal spending and shrink the size of the government. Colleges and universities receive billions of dollars in federal funds each year through the federal student aid programs, competitive grants, research funds, and many other programs throughout the government.
In addition, an executive order establishes a federal policy that discretionary federal funds should not be used to support an educational institution “that requires students to have received a COVID-19 vaccination to attend any in-person education program.” To effectuate the order, the Secretary of Education, in conjunction with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, must develop a plan to end vaccine mandates in schools.
Read also: About Grossmont Community College
tags: #college #accreditation #executive #order #details
