In a sharp rebuke to faculty unions challenging the Trump administration’s grip on academia, a federal judge in Manhattan has tossed out a lawsuit aimed at halting funding cuts and intrusive policy demands imposed on Columbia University.
The case, brought by the American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, who ruled the groups had no standing to sue. Notably, Columbia University itself chose not to be part of the legal challenge—something the judge called “conspicuously absent.”
The unions had sought to block what they described as political coercion from the White House, which included the threat of slashing $400 million in funding and demands to reshape student disciplinary practices and tighten oversight over the university’s Middle Eastern studies department.
But Vyskocil wasn’t having it. “Our democracy cannot very well function if individual judges issue extraordinary relief to every plaintiff who clamors to object to executive action,” she wrote, emphasizing that district courts aren’t policymaking arms of government. She added that if any funds were unjustly withheld, it’s up to the “appropriate plaintiff” to seek redress—Columbia, not its faculty representatives.
The judge’s ruling landed just days after the Department of Education warned Columbia it could lose accreditation due to alleged failures in protecting Jewish students—especially in the context of pro-Palestinian campus activism. Columbia, one of the first universities publicly targeted under Trump’s higher education overhaul campaign, has already started complying with several federal demands, including enhancing campus security and reviewing its area studies programs.
Unbowed by the setback, the unions vowed to keep pushing. “The Trump administration’s threats and coercion at Columbia University are part of an authoritarian agenda that extends far beyond Columbia,” said Todd Wolfson, union president. “We will continue to fight back.”
The lawsuit originally focused on hundreds of millions in threatened cuts but was later expanded to shield over $5 billion in federal grants and contracts from potential interference.
Judge Vyskocil, appointed during Trump’s tenure, concluded that any “chilling effect” the faculty felt did not clearly stem from government action alone. The legal challenge, she suggested, relied too heavily on political disagreement and not enough on judicially recognizable harm.
The case was formally titled American Association of University Professors et al. v. U.S. Department of Justice et al., filed in the Southern District of New York. An appeal is expected.
