American voters have officially handed control of both the House and the Senate to the Democratic Party, sending immediate shockwaves through Washington and prompting a profound sigh of relief across much of the higher education sector. For many college and university leaders, the sudden shift in congressional power is being read simultaneously as a reprieve from relentless federal pressure and an explicit rebuke of the previous administration\u2019s sweeping actions regarding campus governance. Public policy expert and prominent scholar Shaun Harper has already publicly called on the incoming congressional majority to make safeguarding the U.S. Education Department an urgent, top-tier legislative priority. Meanwhile, key committee leaders on Capitol Hill are reportedly preparing to issue subpoenas for Education Secretary Linda McMahon. These impending inquiries are expected to rigorously review how the department\u2019s broad array of educational programs and funding streams were recently scattered across various federal agencies, including the Departments of Labor, Treasury, Health and Human Services, and the Interior.<\/p>\n
Yet, even as Washington prepares for a dramatic realignment of political power and congressional oversight, one specific item on Secretary McMahon\u2019s ambitious campus agenda still carries a strict deadline that falls well before the newly elected class of legislators is formally sworn into office. Back in August, McMahon issued an open National Call to Action, formally requesting every higher education institution across the nation to publish a formal statement on its official website before the close of 2026. This mandate asks colleges to answer seven distinct sets of questions touching on sensitive topics ranging from undergraduate and graduate admissions policies to the influence of foreign entities. The third set of questions specifically asks how each individual institution plans to actively encourage "intellectual pluralism in all its academic units." This particular prompt is heavily framed around a growing federal concern that academic disciplines increasingly "skew toward one side of the ideological spectrum," complete with mandatory follow-up inquiries regarding faculty hiring practices and institutional research directions.<\/p>\n
This brings campus administrators and legal counsel to the absolute crux of the issue: how is the federal government actually defining "pluralism," and are federal bureaucrats truly the ones best situated to shape such a profound philosophical and operational question for independent colleges and universities? <\/p>\n
Officially, Secretary McMahon\u2019s letter was designated as voluntary, and the text does not explicitly name any immediate, formal penalties for institutions that decline to participate. However, very few campus presidents are reading the mandate that way or taking chances with federal relations. In fact, the Department of Education\u2019s deputy chief of staff openly acknowledged that future federal funding conversations would naturally take an institution\u2019s stated commitment to these proposed changes into account. Legal experts advising universities have warned campus leadership that the single greatest risk of maintaining silence is the potential loss of lucrative federal research dollars, while simultaneously cautioning that providing an answer the current administration perceives as misaligned could immediately trigger punitive funding cuts or exhaustive further federal investigations. <\/p>\n
Caught uncomfortably between these two undesirable outcomes, the vast majority of higher education institutions have chosen to remain completely quiet. The recent election results, however, may ultimately make that strategic silence much easier to maintain. With congressional subpoenas on the horizon and a weakened administration facing a hostile new legislative majority, many university presidents may soon conclude that a controversial demand from a departing administration can simply be left to expire on the vine.<\/p>\n
This complex political dynamic highlights a deeper caution. The recent election served as a stark reminder of just how quickly power in Washington changes hands from one party to another. The incoming congressional majority will inevitably bring its own distinct set of ideas regarding what colleges and universities should value, just as the outgoing administration has forcefully pursued its own agenda. But when a foundational concept like pluralism becomes tightly attached to one political side\u2019s partisan platform, it becomes remarkably easy for that side\u2019s political allies to treat compliance as a loyalty test, while its vocal critics treat the entire concept as politically contaminated. <\/p>\n
In either scenario, the core meaning of the word ends up being whatever Washington says it means at any given moment. A moral or institutional commitment that is eagerly adopted only when one political party controls Washington, and just as quickly abandoned or altered when the opposing party takes over, is not truly an institutional commitment at all. Today\u2019s college students are remarkably astute and can readily tell the difference between genuine philosophical conviction and performative compliance.<\/p>\n
True pluralism is far more than a simple demographic distribution of diverse political viewpoints neatly displayed on a faculty roster. Genuine pluralism is fundamentally a practice that happens actively between people. It asks individuals to respect one another\u2019s deepest moral and philosophical commitments, to relate constructively across the sharp lines those commitments inevitably draw, and to cooperate meaningfully on vital work that none of them could possibly accomplish alone. <\/p>\n
In practice on a college campus, this looks like an evangelical student and a secular student who unexpectedly find themselves co-leading a local community service project; it looks like a campus Muslim student association working collaboratively to coordinate prayer spaces with the local Catholic campus ministry office; or it looks like a progressive student and a conservative student in a crowded seminar discovering they share a deep, mutual worry about the future of the local town\u2014concerns each had previously assumed belonged exclusively to their own political tribe. <\/p>\n
While faculty viewpoint diversity certainly matters within higher education, it is merely one ingredient among many. Religious, moral, and cultural differences\u2014which Secretary McMahon\u2019s federal letter fails to mention even once\u2014are frequently the exact arenas where students learn the most about the difficult art of living alongside neighbors they cannot simply argue into political agreement.<\/p>\n
From the perspective of Catholic social teaching, there is a specific philosophical name for why this vital work rightfully belongs on local campuses rather than in federal offices. The principle of "subsidiarity" holds that complex decisions fundamentally belong with the specific community closest to them, and that larger, overarching bodies exist strictly to support smaller ones rather than to absorb, dictate to, or destroy them. By that measured standard, the individual colleges and universities themselves\u2014rather than any shifting federal administration or congressional majority\u2014are the proper entities to decide what pluralism truly asks of them.<\/p>\n
A closer, more careful reading of Secretary McMahon\u2019s letter actually leaves institutional room for this autonomy. McMahon explicitly writes that there is "no single template for academic excellence" and expresses hope that institutions of many different types, each guided by its own unique mission, will ultimately issue their own distinct declarations of purpose. Perhaps campuses would be wise to take her precisely at her word on that particular point, choosing to define their missions independently without accepting the administration\u2019s narrow framing of the underlying problem.<\/p>\n
What remains most important is that campuses continue articulating, in their own authentic words and within the contexts most meaningful to their specific communities, what pluralism truly means right where they are\u2014and that they do so regardless of whether anyone in Washington is currently reading their statements. A faith-based Catholic university might explain how its theological mission compels it to actively invite students of every religious tradition and none into honest, rigorous conversation about the common good. A sprawling public research university might describe how it deliberately structures constructive disagreement within residence halls and lecture classrooms so that students practically learn to live alongside neighbors they did not choose, preparing them for the realities of civic life. A community college, whose classrooms routinely hold the full socioeconomic and generational range of their surrounding region in a single room, might describe how a military veteran, a recent immigrant, and a parent returning to school after decades away learn to work through difficult questions together. <\/p>\n
Any of these localized, authentic accounts would easily outlast a temporary public statement hastily written merely to please whoever happens to hold political power in Washington this year, while simultaneously serving to genuinely inspire the faculty, staff, and students who read them every day. <\/p>\n
The recent election fundamentally changed which political actors will be asking the oversight questions when January arrives, but it did not change the underlying reality. Pluralism, if it is going to retain any real meaning on our college and university campuses, must continue to be something that academic communities define and practice for themselves.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
American voters have officially handed control of both the House and the Senate to the Democratic Party, sending immediate shockwaves through Washington and prompting a profound sigh of relief across much of the higher education sector. For many college and university leaders, the sudden shift in congressional power is being read simultaneously as a reprieve […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1895,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[518],"tags":[283,486,2167,520,2171,523,519,522,2169,2172,1539,981,2170,682,521,2168],"class_list":["post-1896","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interfaith-family-ethics","tag-campus","tag-education","tag-faces","tag-family-ethics","tag-federal","tag-higher","tag-interfaith","tag-interfaith-parenting","tag-majorities","tag-mandates","tag-pluralism","tag-reality","tag-scrutinize","tag-shifting","tag-spiritual-diversity","tag-washington"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1896","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1896"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1896\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1895"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1896"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1896"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spiritualparent.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1896"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}