LOS ANGELES — The University of Southern California on Thursday rejected the controversial education compact the Trump administration offered it and eight other schools, saying it would undermine “values of free inquiry and academic excellence.”

USC interim President Beong-Soo Kim said in a statement that he had sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Education turning down the Trump offer, which would give priority research funding access to universities that agree to follow the president’s mostly conservative vision of higher education.

His letter, which USC provided to the Los Angeles Times, was addressed to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and said that the compact “raises a number of issues worthy of further discussion within both higher education and our nation.”

But, Kim wrote, the university had concerns about the Trump administration’s offer.

“We are concerned that even though the Compact would be voluntary, tying research benefits to it would, over time, undermine the same values of free inquiry and academic excellence that the Compact seeks to promote,” Kim wrote. “Other countries whose governments lack America’s commitment to freedom and democracy have shown how academic excellence can suffer when shifting external priorities tilt the research playing field away from free, meritocratic competition.”

The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

Still, Kim’s letter said that the university “fully agrees” with a portion of the compact that says academic excellence requires a “vibrant marketplace of ideas where all different views can be explored, debated, and challenged.”

“To foster such an environment at USC, we have committed ourselves to institutional neutrality and launched a number of initiatives designed to promote civil discourse across the ideological spectrum,” Kim wrote to McMahon in the letter dated Thursday. “Without an environment where students and faculty can freely debate a broad range of ideas and viewpoints, we could not produce outstanding research, teach our students to think critically, or instill the civic values needed for our democracy to flourish.”

In a letter to the USC community Thursday, Kim addressed the often heated campus debate on the compact.

“I appreciate the various points of view shared with me by many members of our community,” Kim said in a statement. “Although USC has declined to join the proposed Compact, we look forward to contributing our perspectives, insights, and Trojan values to an important national conversation about the future of higher education.”

Some faculty members who opposed the compact said they were pleased with Kim’s decision.

“This shows that when a broad coalition of faculty, students, staff, and workers comes together at USC and across the country, we can affect institutional change,” said Sanjay Madhav, an associate professor of practice at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering. “While it’s promising that USC rejected this unconstitutional compact, there is still more work to be done and the fight for academic freedom and higher education itself is not yet over.”

The compact — which had already been rejected by MIT and Brown and also on Thursday, the University of Pennsylvania — has roiled higher education and drawn the ire of Gov. Gavin Newsom with its demands for rightward campus policy shifts in exchange for priority federal funding and other benefits.

Newsom had aggressively weighed in, challenging USC “to do the right thing” and reject the offer. He threatened to withhold state funding to any California university that agrees to it.

The University of Texas suggested earlier this month that it could agree to Trump’s terms. Leaders of the Texas system were “honored” that the Austin campus was chosen to be a part of the compact, and its “potential funding advantages,” according to a statement from Kevin Eltife, chair of the board of regents.

Provided to USC on Oct. 1, the compact requires universities to make a range of commitments in line with Trump’s political agenda.

The compact calls on universities to accept the government’s definition of gender — two sexes, male and female — and bans colleges from recognizing transgender people’s gender identities. Foreign student enrollment would be restricted. The compact also stipulates a five-year tuition freeze for U.S. students.

It asks colleges to require the SAT or ACT for all undergraduate applicants and to eliminate race, sex and other characteristics from admissions decisions.

As for free speech, schools would have to commit to promoting a wide range of views on campus — and change or abolish “institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas,” according to the compact.

The compact had been strongly rejected by the USC Academic Senate, which on Oct. 6 met and heard from 20-plus professors, department heads and others who spoke out against the document. In forceful speeches during the virtual meeting, participants called the compact “egregiously invalid,” “probably unconstitutional,” “antithetical to principles of academic freedom” and “a Trojan horse.”

USC associate history professor Aro Velmet, who had attended the Oct. 6 meeting, lauded Kim’s decision to reject the compact, but said the move reflected “how much pressure the president got from more or less everyone on campus.”

“We are relieved President Kim did the right thing and we applaud him for it. It is a victory in this battle,” said Velmet. “(But) the war is ongoing. It is very likely that the federal government will be trying to put pressure on universities in some other form.”

There were dissenting views.

USC chemistry professor Anna Krylov said that universities that reject the compact without “providing feedback to improve it” are signaling that “they have no intention of acknowledging their failures — or of taking meaningful steps toward reform.”

But Krylov said that she was pleased with the letter Kim sent to McMahon, which she said “expresses agreement with the aspirations of the Compact and at least signals a willingness to reform.”

Although the compact was offered directly to the small group of universities, a White House official said Tuesday that it is also a blueprint for additional campuses.

“We have not proactively reached out to all universities. The initial 9 colleges still have time to provide their feedback on the proposed compact. However, of course, we would not turn away universities that are wanting to make a positive difference and lead the way,” the official said.

In a social media post on Sunday, Trump also indicated that the agreement was open to other colleges.

“For those Institutions that want to quickly return to the pursuit of Truth and Achievement, they are invited to enter into a forward looking Agreement with the Federal Government to help bring about the Golden Age of Academic Excellence in Higher Education. They will agree to follow Federal Law, and protect the Civil Rights of ALL Students, Faculty, and Employees on Campuses,” the president said.

The compact has not been given to California State University or University of California campuses. In a meeting with the UC Academic Senate last week, UC President James B. Milliken suggested UC would not agree to it if it was asked to sign on.

_____

©2025 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.