I’m old enough to remember when it was all the rage to be institutionally neutral.

It was just a few months ago. Institutional neutrality, a policy in which university leaders refrain from commenting on political issues, was the universally-held remedy for the many issues of American universities. Politicians from every end of the spectrum, administrators angling for an end to painful Congressional hearings and free-speech activists were all in agreement: the time of universities taking political positions was over. Yale agreed, and new policies instructing administrators on how and when to speak were implemented.

I remember thinking: fair enough. I can understand the appeal of an institutionally neutral university. Edicts from university administrators on morality are divisive. The American public is sick and tired of campus politics on the 5 o’clock news. One third of America has little to no confidence in higher education. As such, the idea of the university as an unbiased forum for debate serves a greater purpose: rebuilding public trust in universities as a nonpartisan public good.

At least at Yale, we’re doing our part. We’ve quieted down. We are walking the talk of institutional neutrality. So can we please study in peace?

If universities are to be separated from politics, it must be a two-way street. Our legislators need to treat institutes of higher education neutrally. Legislators need to separate partisan politics and the nonpartisan pursuit of knowledge. That is not what is happening right now.

It is one thing to expand the already-extensive process of securing NIH funding in the name of promoting higher quality research. Research journals can be fairly criticized for putting useful research beyond a paywall. If legislators want to make policy changes on the basis of increasing scientific standards or access, go ahead. But politically motivated cuts to university research funding, as we are seeing with our aspiring summer researchers, are another matter entirely. These students are not politicians or radical activists. They are astrophysicists. Are astrophysics political? 

If the goal is to depoliticize universities, why are we making federal support for apolitical, educational goals contingent on agreement with inherently political positions? 

Maybe you agree with the political goals of this initiative, or maybe you don’t. It doesn’t matter. This specific mandate pales when compared to the precedent it sets. Making educational funding contingent on adherence to a government’s prescribed social agenda promotes institutional uniformity, not institutional neutrality. That should be concerning to Americans from every range of the political spectrum.

Legislators use the straw man of the hyper-political, extremely wealthy private university to justify proposals that slash university funding and heavily tax university endowments. And indeed, a select group of private universities have massive, GDP-sized endowments. The highly specific nature of endowment funds aside, only these very wealthy private institutions will be able to support their students through these politicized cuts. For instance, the previously mentioned Yale astrophysicists are now being funded, albeit unsustainably, by Yale itself. To see the true victim of these funding cuts, I can look to the hospital where I was delivered: the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School. Their Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences just announced the rescinding of all offers of admission to students. All that will be left if these efforts continue are the very universities these policies are intended to punish.

A final note on institutional neutrality: Yale decided that even while neutral, administrators may speak publicly on issues directly affecting the university’s mission. Even the most institutionally neutral scholar would agree we have met this standard. President McInnis, you have an opportunity. There is still value to be found at this university, least of all in the doubling in economic returns of every NIH dollar we spend. The intra-campus email was a start, but I urge you to speak to the country on the value of what we do here. Without public trust in higher education, all the world’s best lobbyists and DC backchanneling will be for nothing.

ROHIL MOHAN is a first year in Morse College studying Economics and Political Science. He can be reached at rohil.mohan@yale.edu.