Danish researcher in the US feeling the Trump pressure: »Surely, universities should be where we speak freely«

Since Donald Trump returned to the White House in January, his administration has launched an increasingly aggressive campaign against US universities.

Arguing that it is combating antisemitism, the Trump administration is attempting to force elite institutions like Harvard and Columbia to change their admissions policies, shut down diversity programmes, and impose controls on teaching and hiring.

And as billions in federal funding are frozen, and universities are threatened with the loss of tax-exempt status and access to international students, fear and self-censorship is spreading.

Morten Stensgaard Larsen is a Danish lecturer posted abroad to teach language and culture, and a PhD student at the University of Washington. He feels the effects. His research focuses on representations of work in Danish literature — a seemingly harmless topic. But something has changed, he says.

»I’ve been wondering whether I should avoid focusing on, say, the experiences of transgender people, or migrant work experiences in my research. It’s highly relevant to my topic, but you ask yourself: Does this still make sense?«

Daily life with invisible boundaries

The University of Washington is among the institutions that the Trump administration has labelled ideologically ‘problematic’. The university’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts have made it a target in the government’s culture war.

»We’ve been placed under special monitoring,« says Morten Stensgaard Larsen:

»We’ve received memos instructing us to ensure that hiring and promotions are based on qualifications. We already do that, but it comes across as a directive that implies something else — as if we’re prioritising identity over academic merit.«

It’s not prohibitions and censorship that dictate what researchers do. It’s a more diffuse reality, where you begin to restrain yourself, he says:

»We have discussions about how we name working groups, what we call our documents, and whether we should even send certain things via email. Our emails are part of the public record, and who knows who might end up reading them through a freedom of information request?«

The sense of uncertainty intensified for Morten Stensgaard Larsen when his colleague, Lillian Dixon — who has worked in the US for decades and holds a green card — was suddenly detained by immigration authorities.

»It was a specific and painful example showing that this isn’t just about newcomers or specific fields of research. The system is so opaque that it can just happen out of the blue.«

In the wake of the incident, university management issued a 12-page guide for staff explaining how to respond if authorities show up during a lecture.

The war on woke

The University of Washington is not the only institution feeling the pressure. Across the United States, universities have found themselves in the crosshairs of a coordinated campaign by the Trump administration.

The government has frozen more than USD 2 billion (DKK 16bn) in funding to Harvard University, threatened to revoke its right to enrol international students, and called on tax authorities to strip Harvard of its tax-exempt status.

Columbia University, under pressure from the Trump administration, has introduced measures such as mandatory participant identification at protests and increased monitoring of selected faculties.

»We’re not looking to just file lawsuits — we want to compel a cultural change in how Jewish Americans are treated on college campuses,« US Attorney General Pam Bondi explained, according to The New York Times.

The news media also reports that the campaign is no longer just about antisemitism. According to the administration’s own advisers, the goal is to combat so-called woke ideology — a move backed by conservative activists who have openly discussed shutting down individual universities to set an example.

A system under the shadow of self-censorship

For Morten Stensgaard Larsen and his colleagues, the unease is palpable. Not because anyone explicitly tells them to stay silent, but because they begin to think that way themselves.

»It’s a disturbing experience in the sense that I’ve found myself thinking — surely, the university should be the place where we can speak freely and have the difficult and critical conversations. If not here, then where?« he asks.

Some international students on visas have asked him whether it is even safe to observe a protest and write about it in an academic context.

»It’s completely absurd. But they ask because they’re afraid there might be consequences. And as a lecturer, it’s painful to hear,« he says.

Would like to stay — but …

Morten Stensgaard Larsen has one year left on his contract and expects to return to Denmark, where his wife and child live. But he had previously considered staying longer in the US. That now seems less appealing, he says:

»Some of the charm has worn off because the political climate can be problematic,« he says.

Still, he points out that it makes a difference living in the US state of Washington, where the majority votes Democrat and opposes Trump. He senses that local authorities are trying to shield universities from federal interference.

»I probably feel safer here than I would in, say, Florida,« he says.

Despite the pressure, Morten Stensgaard Larsen remains optimistic. Not naively so — but because he sees both researchers and university leadership trying to uphold the core values of higher education.

»When questions begin to arise about what we’re allowed to say and think, I genuinely believe it is the university’s noblest task to stand firm on the value of intellectual freedom and critical analysis. If we don’t, I honestly can’t see why we even bother having universities,« he says.