A federal judge has barred the Trump administration from cutting federal funding to the University of California, calling the government’s actions an effort to force ideological changes on elite universities.
US District Judge Rita Lin of San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction late Friday. The ruling prevents the administration from demanding payments or imposing fines on the University of California over claims that it violates civil rights through its handling of antisemitism and affirmative action policies.
Judge Lin said the plaintiffs, including faculty, researchers, and students, provided “overwhelming evidence” that the administration is running a “concerted campaign to purge ‘woke,’ ‘left’ and ‘socialist’ viewpoints from the country’s leading universities.”
Lin added that the administration uses a “playbook of initiating civil rights investigations” at universities. She said these tactics aim to cut federal funding, “bringing universities to their knees and forcing them to change their ideological tune.”
In July, the administration froze $584 million in federal funding for the University of California, Los Angeles. The freeze followed accusations that UCLA discriminated against Jewish and Israeli students during pro-Palestinian protests in 2024. Officials claimed UCLA created a “hostile educational environment” and acted with “deliberate indifference.”
In October, the administration proposed a deal to nine major US universities. The deal offered funding in exchange for policy changes, including banning race or sex as factors in admissions and hiring. It also required removing departments accused of punishing or belittling conservative ideas.
The University of California system was not included in this offer, though the University of Southern California, a private school, was approached.
California Governor Gavin Newsom warned that any state university accepting the administration’s proposed settlement would lose state funding.
Democracy Forward, a progressive legal advocacy group, criticized the administration’s actions. The group called the funding threats “strong-arm tactics” and said they represent “a dangerous step toward autocracy” and a betrayal of the constitution.
The ruling is seen as a major check on the federal government’s ability to influence university policies through financial pressure. Legal experts say the injunction could affect other cases where the administration seeks to tie federal funds to ideological compliance.
The Trump administration has not commented publicly on Judge Lin’s decision. Meanwhile, UC officials praised the ruling, saying it protects academic freedom and the right of universities to set their own policies without political interference.
University campuses across the US have faced growing federal scrutiny in recent years, with officials using civil rights laws as a basis to challenge admissions policies, curriculum choices, and campus speech practices. Critics argue this threatens the independence of higher education institutions.
The case highlights the tension between federal authority and university autonomy. Judge Lin’s decision reinforces that universities cannot be pressured to adopt specific political views to maintain funding.
Students and faculty at UC have expressed relief over the ruling. Many see it as a defense of free expression and institutional independence.
The injunction comes amid broader national debates about the role of politics in higher education. Supporters of the administration’s approach argue it ensures fairness in admissions and campus policies. Opponents warn that linking funding to ideological conformity undermines the constitution and academic integrity.
As the legal process continues, the preliminary injunction ensures that the University of California will continue receiving federal funds without being forced to comply with the administration’s policy demands.
