Mount Holyoke President Says Higher Education Community Should ‘Resist’ Trump
“Instead, we need to just say ‘No! Here’s what we stand for.”
Maybe Trump should ‘resist’ giving any federal funding to Mount Holyoke. Turnabout is fair play, right?
Campus Reform reports:
Mount Holyoke President Danielle Holley says colleges should resist Trump: ‘No! Here’s what we stand for’
The President of Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts said that the higher education community should actively resist Trump as he attempts to implement his agenda in 2025.
Mount Holyoke President Danielle Holley made the comments in an interview with New England Public Media, stating that higher education leaders shouldn’t make it easy for Trump.
“To basically comply with things that are not within our values simply because we feel a threat of investigation is something that we should not be doing as the higher education community,” Holley said. “Instead, we need to just say ‘No! Here’s what we stand for. We will continue to stand for this. And if you believe that you can legally challenge our mission or our values, that’s up to you to try to do.”
Holley contended that Trump’s threats against higher education are unconstitutional and would face legal challenges, specifically in regards to his planned action against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
She also said that Mount Holyoke will try to support students from out of state who Trump’s policies might impact, adding the college might offer gender-affirming care to students who can’t access it where they are from.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
‘No! Here’s what we stand for. We will continue to stand for this.”
We already know what you stand for, and other things you claim to stand for but quickly abandon every time an offender is from a “privileged community.”
Okay, Danielle wants to offer gender-affirming care to students who can’t get it from where they’re from? Assuming that the average age of a student is 18 or over, they are legally adults so it would be legal for them to obtain it. Danielle’s useless, moronic virtue signaling is moot. And by the way, the drugs aren’t cheap and probably aren’t covered on all insurance plans.
Big thing, though, for Danielle—it’s Congress cutting off federal largess she has to worry about. Congress is in no mood to put up with a lot of crap from self-righteous, anti-Semitic leftist college administrators. If she is foolish enough to tempt them, she’ll find her institution’s eligibility flushed down the toilet.
Using only Holley’s name as a guide, I guessed her, umm, err, uhh, “melanin content.”
I was right.
So the college is going to make Trump sue them to implement federal actions? Isn’t that the way it is going now? What a bunch of hot air from that tiny college.
Bring it on . . . .
When DoEd issues the expected “Dear Colleague” letters on Day 1 that essentially makes colleges choose between their identity politics programs in admissions / hiring / tenure / promotion / etc. and getting federal funds, watch how fast such “resistance” folds their tents.
We are about to see a HUGE contraction in higher ed, which is going to mean that the current oversupply of PhD’s who want to be / continue being professors is going to get a LOT worse. Faced with having to choose virtue signaling or their paychecks, guess what they will pick (especially given that, if they get laid off, the chances of finding a comparable job is essentially nil)?