Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, AGENCY NEWS—AFT, AAUP respond to Education Secretary’s second proposed higher education compact, (Aug 4, 2026)

By Jason Albright, J.D.

“Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s demands for ‘reform’ are designed to make unprecedented federal political intervention in colleges and universities appear reasonable.”

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon yesterday issued “A National Call to Action to University Presidents and Governing Boards,” asking university leaders and governing boards “to reaffirm their commitment to serving the American people” via seven specified “planned reforms.” Two unions representing employees in higher education issued an immediate response. In a statement issued by AFT President Randi Weingarten and AAUP President Todd Wolfson, the unions observed that McMahon’s letter “asks colleges and universities to align themselves with a far-right agenda at the expense of students’ education and the public’s well-being.”

The letter. In her August 3, 2026 letter to university presidents and board members, McMahon observes that “America’s oldest universities were founded almost 400 years ago and have, since the colonial era, helped to forge the political leaders, institutions, and public culture that made this country the greatest in the world.” Nonetheless, according to the Secretary, “as higher education has drifted from the principles that built up so much public esteem, Americans’ trust in universities has reached record lows.”

The call. McMahon’s letter calls on every postsecondary institution, before the end of 2026, to “describe to the American public your commitments to rigorous teaching, pathbreaking research, and national service—commitments that make our universities a bedrock institution of the American republic.” She asks that the statements be posted prominently on institutional websites. “Only full candor and transparency can begin to strengthen the bonds between higher education and the American people,” the letter asserts.

Specifics. In “detailing your commitments to your students and the American people,” McMahon asks institutional leaders to address seven specific questions, “detailing adopted and planned reforms.”

Admissions. First, McMahon alleges, “The opacity of university admissions has caused allegations of favoritism, unjust outcomes, and illegal discrimination.” “How,” the letter asks, “will your institution ensure that admissions criteria are transparent and wholly described to prospective applicants? And how will your institution ensure admissions decisions are based on merit, achievement, and your university’s educational purpose?”

Free speech. Second, McMahon notes, “Institutions must encourage an ethic of free speech and foster a thriving marketplace of ideas, guided by open inquiry and honest debate.” The Secretary accordingly asks, “How will your institution protect the free exchange of ideas, wide-ranging debate, and open minded campus discourse? And how will you guarantee that unruly and violent protestors do not harass students or disrupt classes, research, public lectures, and campus operations?”

Politicization of disciplines? Next, McMahon alleges, “Some academic disciplines and departments have subordinated the scholarly pursuit to political and social goals….” Here, the letter asks, among other things, “How will your institution encourage intellectual pluralism in all its academic units?”

Cost. She also addresses the cost of higher education: “How will your institution ensure that families can access affordable, high-return, degrees? What can your school do to contain costs, improve pricing transparency, and ensure that every academic program equips students to repay their loans?”

AI. Addressing artificial intelligence, McMahon asks, “How will your institution incentivize rigor in the age of AI, combat grade inflation, and prioritize excellence in teaching and learning?”

“[F]oreign influence.” Next, McMahon notes, “University leaders must ensure that the research enterprise is oriented toward advancing the U.S. national interest—not our adversaries'—by refusing gifts with problematic conditions and ensuring that foreign actors do not unduly influence academic programming, research personnel, researcher assignments, or student admissions.” She accordingly asks, “How will your school protect academic programs from foreign influence and safeguard the integrity of the research enterprise?”

America first. Finally, McMahon asserts, “American universities must put Americans, and American interests, first. That means prioritizing American students and faculty, orienting the research enterprise to support the country’s economic and security needs, and putting American societal success ahead of global commitments.” Here, among other things, she asks, “How can your campus and faculty advance American security interests, deliver academic programs that meet urgent workforce needs, and contribute materially to the Nation’s prosperity?”

AFT and AAUP response. In their response, the two unions observed, “The Trump administration is back with a second version of its higher education compact. The reason is simple: The first one failed—and failed for good reason. This compact was not about investing in higher education or helping students succeed—it’s all about continuing culture wars.” This second compact, the unions asserted, “once again asks colleges and universities to align themselves with a far-right agenda at the expense of students’ education and the public’s well-being.”

Unprecedented intervention. “Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s demands for ‘reform’ are designed to make unprecedented federal political intervention in colleges and universities appear reasonable,” noted the unions. “Racially coded descriptions of ‘admissions decisions... based on merit’ and ‘prioritizing American students and faculty,’ as well as the mischaracterization of peaceful protesters as ‘unruly and violent,’ show that the Trump administration’s goals remain the same.”

Organize. “As with the first compact,” the unions note, “the best path forward is for higher education workers to organize and demand that their administrations and governing boards reject Compact 2.0. There is every reason to believe we can do so again.”

Alternative vision. “The solution to opaque college admissions, skyrocketing tuition, the onslaught of artificial intelligence and degraded academic freedom,” the unions state, “isn’t the racism, program closures, restrictions on free speech and xenophobia embodied in Compact 2.0. Instead, we must continue fighting for what higher education should be: debt-free, an engine of innovation and economic opportunity, a driver of lifesaving research, a place where students prepare for meaningful careers and thriving lives, and an institution that welcomes everyone.”

News: AgencyNews UnionsMembers OrganizingElections IndividualRights AINews ESGNews