The interim president of Columbia University abruptly left her post Friday evening as the school confronted the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding and the Trump administration’s mounting skepticism about its leadership. The move came one week after Columbia bowed to a series of demands from the federal government, which had canceled approximately $400 million in essential federal funding, and it made way for Columbia’s third leader since August. Claire Shipman, who had been the co-chair of the university’s board of trustees, was named the acting president and replaced Dr. Katrina Armstrong. The university, which was deeply shaken by a protest encampment last spring and a volley of accusations that it had become a safe haven for antisemitism, announced the leadership change in an email to the campus Friday night. The letter thanked Dr. Armstrong for her efforts during “a time of great uncertainty for the university” and said that Ms. Shipman has “a clear understanding of the serious challenges facing our community.” Less than a week ago, the Trump administration had signaled that it was satisfied with Dr. Armstrong and the steps she was taking to restore the funding. But in a statement on Friday, its Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism said that Dr. Armstrong’s departure from the presidency was “an important step toward advancing negotiations” between the government and the university. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT The statement included a cryptic mention of a “concerning revelation” this week, which appeared to refer to comments from Dr. Armstrong at a faculty meeting last weekend. According to a faculty member who attended, Dr. Armstrong and her provost, Angela Olinto, confused some people when they seemed to downplay the effects of the university’s agreement with the government. A transcript of the meeting had been leaked to the news media, as well as to the Trump administration, according to two people familiar with the situation. Ms. Shipman, a journalist with two degrees from Columbia, is taking charge of one of the nation’s pre-eminent universities at an extraordinarily charged moment in American higher education. The federal government is threatening to end the flow of billions of dollars to universities across the country, many of which are facing inquiries from agencies that range from the Justice Department to the Department of Health and Human Services. But the Trump administration’s punitive approach to universities is playing out most acutely at Columbia. The university, a hub of last spring’s campus protest movement against the war in Gaza, has spent months confronting accusations from one side that it condoned antisemitic behavior and permitted lawlessness to dominate, and from the other that it stifled academic and political speech. The government’s move this month to cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in support to Columbia — which draws roughly a fifth of its operating revenues from Washington — represented a dire threat to the university. The government told Columbia it would consider restarting those grants and contracts only after the university agreed to a list of demands. Editors’ Picks What a New American Citizen Learned on Route 66 Simple Sandals Are Always a Good Investment Is ‘Reef Safe’ Sunscreen Really Better? Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Last week, it fell to Dr. Armstrong to announce that Columbia had done so. Among other steps, Columbia said it would have 36 campus safety officers with arrest powers, a shift with enormous resonance at a university that has a long history of campus activism and fraught ties with law enforcement. The university also said it would adopt a formal definition of antisemitism, review its admissions policies and, in a turn that was especially alarming to professors who cherish academic freedom, impose new oversight of the university’s Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies Department. Although university officials said they had already been considering some of the government’s demands, Columbia’s acquiescence drew significant condemnation on the campus and beyond. Other higher education leaders watched nervously, fearing that the university’s decision, without mounting a court challenge that many felt stood a reasonable chance of success, would provoke the government to target other universities. Two days before Columbia announced its decision, the government said it would withhold about $175 million in funding to the University of Pennsylvania because the school allowed a transgender woman to be a member of its women’s swim team in 2022. Dr. Armstrong’s departure from the presidency was about as abrupt as her ascension to it last summer. Then, not long before classes began, Nemat Shafik resigned as president, ending a 13-month tenure that had led to global criticism of Columbia. “Dr. Armstrong accepted the role of interim president at a time of great uncertainty for the university and worked tirelessly to promote the interests of our community,” David J. Greenwald, the chair of the board of trustees, said in a statement on Friday. The university said that Dr. Armstrong would remain at Columbia as the head of the university’s medical center. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In an email addressed to colleagues on Friday evening, Dr. Armstrong said it had been “a singular honor to lead Columbia University in this important and challenging time.” “My heart is with science, and my passion is with healing,” she added. “That is where I can best serve this University and our community moving forward.” The Wall Street Journal first reported that Dr. Armstrong would be leaving the Columbia presidency. Less than a week ago, Linda McMahon, the Trump administration’s education secretary, had suggested that she was pleased with Dr. Armstrong’s work. “She knew that this was her responsibility to make sure that children on her campus were safe,” Ms. McMahon, told CNN last weekend. “She wanted to make sure there was no discrimination of any kind. She wanted to address any systemic issues that were identified relative to the antisemitism on campus. And they have worked very hard in a very short period of time.” Ms. McMahon said then that Columbia was “on the right track so that we can move forward,” but she stopped short of saying that the government would revive its varied funding agreements with Columbia. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT But the government’s concern about Dr. Armstrong’s commitment was clear by Tuesday, prompting her to release a public letter reaffirming her seriousness. “Any suggestion that these measures are illusory, or lack my personal support, is unequivocally false,” she wrote to Columbia’s community. Brent R. Stockwell, the chair of Columbia’s department of biological sciences, said that despite the criticism this week from some quarters, Dr. Armstrong had maintained the backing of those who felt that reclaiming the university’s federal funding was paramount. “She had quite a lot of support,” Professor Stockwell said. He said he could not speak for everyone but that many in the school’s research community “aren’t willing to give up on the dream that Columbia can better the world and the lives of Americans through research. That is what we are trying to achieve, and that requires federal funds.” Representative Tim Walberg, Republican of Michigan, and the chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, which has been seeking student discipline records from Columbia, said the school must redouble its efforts to overcome its failure “to uphold its commitment to Jewish students and faculty.” Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Representative Walberg also signaled to the new interim president that she would not receive a honeymoon. “Ms. Shipman, while we wish you all good success, we will be watching closely,” Representative Walberg said. Adarsh Pachori, an engineering graduate student at Columbia, said he was left “uncomfortable and worried” by the sudden change in university leadership. “This resignation along with the funding withdrawal, talk of deportations and government involvement in general is frustrating,” said Mr. Pachori, who was walking on campus Friday night. “It is starting to seem that Columbia administration simply caves to the demands of the U.S. government instead of upholding the beliefs and values that are promised at Columbia.”

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested a graduate student attending the University of Minnesota earlier this week, the school said Friday in a statement that called the situation “deeply concerning.” The student was taken into custody on Thursday at an off-campus residence, the school’s president, Rebecca Cunningham, said in the statement. “The university had no prior knowledge of this incident and did not share any information with federal authorities before it occurred,” the statement said. The university did not identify the student’s name, nationality or visa type. Jake Ricker, a university spokesman, said the student was enrolled in the Carlson School of Management. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT ICE officials did not immediately respond to a request for information about the case. The arrest follows other incidents in which ICE targeted international students or scholars at American universities. Three involved students at Columbia University. The other individuals ICE detained or sought to arrest attended Brown, Tufts, Cornell and the University of Alabama. Another case that drew consternation among civil liberties advocates involved Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent U.S. resident and recent graduate at Columbia University who had his green card revoked. A common factor in some of those cases has been the students’ involvement in pro-Palestinian protests or writings last year. Mr. Khalil, who was born in Syria to Palestinian refugees, and who is married to an American citizen, is fighting in federal court the government’s efforts to deport him. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters aboard his plane on Thursday that U.S. officials were “going to err on the side of caution” in weighing visa revocations. Editors’ Picks What a New American Citizen Learned on Route 66 Simple Sandals Are Always a Good Investment Is ‘Reef Safe’ Sunscreen Really Better? Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “We are not going to be importing activists into the United States,” Mr. Rubio said. “They’re here to study. They’re here to go to class. They’re not here to lead activist movements that are disruptive and undermine” universities. While Thursday’s arrest was the first publicly known immigration enforcement action involving a University of Minnesota student, the Trump administration signaled weeks ago that it was scrutinizing the college. The Justice Department announced last month that Minnesota was among 10 schools that investigators would visit to determine whether they “failed to protect Jewish students and faculty members from unlawful discrimination.” The Twin Cities campus — the flagship of Minnesota’s five campuses — was on a list of 60 colleges the Department of Education warned this month were at risk of “potential enforcement actions” because of accusations of antisemitism. Minnesota, which was among the major universities that had a pro-Palestinian protest encampment last spring, has grappled for more than a year with concerns about speech on campus. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Two weeks ago the university’s board of regents declared that Minnesota should largely refrain from issuing official statements about “matters of public concern or public interest.” Top elected officials in the state said Friday evening that they were awaiting more details about Thursday’s arrest, but some signaled alarm. “Our campuses should be a safe place for all students, staff, and visitors,” State Senator Doron Clark said in a statement. “We must stand up against the Trump administration’s senseless demonization of our friends, family and neighbors.”

The University of Michigan will eliminate its central diversity, equity and inclusion program, the school announced on Thursday, seeking to overhaul an ambitious and expensive initiative that it had long cast as a model for American higher education. Michigan — one of the most prestigious public universities in the country — had for years steadily expanded its D.E.I. efforts even as conservative lawmakers and activists in other states successfully campaigned to defund or ban such programs. But on Thursday, amid intensifying pressure on colleges from the Trump administration, Michigan said it would discontinue its diversity “strategic plan,” known as D.E.I. 2.0, and effectively dismantle the large administrative bureaucracy constructed to drive it through the university’s colleges and professional schools. In a campuswide email, officials said Michigan would expand its existing prohibition on so-called diversity statements in faculty hiring, banning their use more broadly in admissions, promotions, awards and annual reviews. Michigan’s academic units will also be asked to “evaluate their web presence” to reflect school and federal guidance. At the same time, the officials said, they planned to redirect funds toward expanded financial aid and student counseling, shifting resources into mental health, pre-professional guidance “and other efforts that strengthen community, promote a sense of belonging and expand accessibility.” Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “These decisions have not been made lightly,” the university’s president, Santa J. Ono, and other top officials wrote in their letter. “We recognize the changes are significant and will be challenging for many of us, especially those whose lives and careers have been enriched by and dedicated to programs that are now pivoting.” School leaders have been debating whether and how to overhaul Michigan’s D.E.I. program since last spring. The Board of Regents signaled in December that changes were likely, arguing that the school’s expansive D.E.I. effort had failed to make it meaningfully more diverse or inclusive.But Thursday’s announcement comes at a more charged moment, as the Trump administration mounts an all-out war on what it considers D.E.I. in both the public and private sectors. Through executive orders and administrative actions — and often operating under a vague and expansive definition of D.E.I. — President Trump has taken aim at an array of policies and programs in higher education, framing them as part of a pernicious and illegal spoils system for racial minorities. Last month, the Education Department warned universities that it viewed any consideration of race in hiring or services to students — such as scholarships, housing and even graduation ceremonies — as a violation of federal law. At the same time, the Trump administration has cited high-profile anti-Israel protests, including at Columbia University, to threaten the loss of federal grants under laws requiring that schools receiving federal money work to prevent racial, ethnic and religious discrimination. Michigan faced similar controversies before Mr. Trump was elected: Campus protests in Ann Arbor exploded after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks in Israel, as did complaints from both Jewish and Muslim students that they had faced harassment or discrimination. Editors’ Picks Is There a Least Bad Alcohol? His Life Savings Were Mailed to Him by Paper Check. Now, It’s Gone. How to Manage Your Blood Sugar With Exercise Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Universities have sought to navigate intense pressure from Washington with rising discontent among students and faculty, many of whom have urged school leaders to fight back harder against the Trump policies and resist the administration’s efforts to dismantle D.E.I. entirely. Across the country, some schools have closed down D.E.I. programs and scrubbed websites; others have rebranded them, hoping to avoid closer scrutiny.Thursday’s announcement alluded to that pressure, citing some of Mr. Trump’s executive orders and a recent court decision supporting them. But school officials also pointed to dissatisfaction from some students and faculty, who had argued that they did not feel included in D.E.I. initiatives and that the programming “fell short in fostering connections among diverse groups.” In December, Michigan fired a senior D.E.I. administrator over accusations that she had made antisemitic comments. Even before Mr. Trump took office, other Michigan students and faculty members began lobbying to preserve the existing D.E.I. program. Thousands signed a petition this winter attesting to what they saw as the positive impact of Michigan’s D.E.I. efforts. Many said they agreed with the broad goals of the D.E.I. program; some Black students have argued that it should be strengthened, with a greater focus on the experience of racial minorities on campus.As Mr. Trump’s inauguration approached, however, Michigan’s largest academic unit, the College of Literature, Science and Arts, quietly paused its D.E.I. planning process, according to an email shared with The New York Times, to avoid drawing more attention from the incoming administration. In February, D.E.I. officials at Michigan circulated talking points that reframed the program as an engine of economic growth for the state and emphasizing that it consumed a tiny portion of the university’s overall budget.Jordan Acker, a Michigan regent, said in a statement that Thursday’s announcement was about making the school’s D.E.I. program work more effectively, not dismantling it in the face of outside criticism. “The focus of our diversity efforts needs to be meaningful change, not bureaucracy,” Mr. Acker said. School officials are likely to face intense pushback from some students and faculty members. As word of the decision began to spread across campus on Thursday, the head of the Faculty Senate, Rebekah Modrak, called an “emergency meeting” for faculty, students and staff on Friday. In an email to her colleagues, Ms. Modrak said university leaders “seem determined to comply and to collaborate in our own destruction.” Michigan’s current D.E.I. program — one of the largest among major public universities in the United States — was started in 2016 amid concerns that the school had failed to attract and retain enough Black students and faculty. Since then, according to an investigation published by The Times Magazine in October, Michigan has spent roughly a quarter of a billion dollars on a wide range of D.E.I. initiatives aimed at improving both economic and racial diversity. The majority of that money went to salaries and benefits for D.E.I. staff across the university’s three campuses, according to an internal accounting prepared by Michigan’s D.E.I. office last year. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT During roughly the same period, however, the proportion of Black students on campus did not substantially change. And in surveys, students reported a less positive campus climate than at the program’s start and less of a sense of belonging. Some students and faculty complained that the school’s heavy emphasis on D.E.I. had chilled the intellectual climate on campus and led academic work to focus too much on questions of identity and oppression. According to one report produced by Michigan’s D.E.I. office in 2023, nearly half of all the school’s undergraduate courses included what the office considered “D.E.I. content,” such as explorations of racial, ethnic or religious identity.

The American Psychological Association, which sets standards for professional training in mental health, has voted to suspend its requirement that postgraduate programs show a commitment to diversity in recruitment and hiring. The decision, by the organization’s commission on accreditation, comes as accrediting bodies throughout higher education scramble to respond to the executive order signed by President Trump attacking diversity, equity and inclusion policies. It pauses a drive to broaden the profession of psychology, which is disproportionately white and female, at a time of rising distress among young Americans. The A.P.A. is the chief accrediting body for professional training in psychology, and the only one recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. It provides accreditation to around 1,300 training programs, including doctoral internships and postdoctoral residencies. Mr. Trump has made accrediting bodies a particular target in his crusade against D.E.I. programs, threatening in one campaign video to “fire the radical Left accreditors that have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist maniacs and lunatics” and “accept applications for new accreditors.” Department of Justice officials have pressured accrediting bodies in recent weeks, warning the American Bar Association in a letter that it might lose its status unless it repealed diversity mandates. The A.B.A. voted in late February to suspend its diversity and inclusion standard for law schools. The concession by the A.P.A., a bastion of support for diversity programming, is a particular landmark. The association has made combating racism a central focus of its work in recent years, and in 2021 adopted a resolution apologizing for its role in perpetuating racism by, among other things, promulgating eugenic theories. Aaron Joyce, the A.P.A.’s senior director of accreditation, said the decision to suspend the diversity requirement was driven by “a large influx of concerns and inquiries” from programs concerned about running afoul of the president’s order.

The Department of Justice said on Thursday that it would investigate whether several California universities were complying with the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision banning the consideration of race in admissions. The checks, which the Justice Department described as “compliance review investigations,” would target Stanford University and three schools in the University of California system — Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Irvine — according to an announcement released by Attorney General Pam Bondi. “President Trump and I are dedicated to ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit-based opportunity across the country,” Ms. Bondi said in a statement. It was not clear whether similar compliance reviews would be conducted at other colleges or universities across the nation.The lawsuits that were the basis for the Supreme Court decision, in the case known as Students for Fair Admissions, were filed against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Plaintiffs in that case used statistical evidence, including standardized test scores, to support the contention that some racial groups, including Black and Hispanic students, had been given preferences in admissions. The plaintiffs argued the practice violated the 14th Amendment. Unlike schools in most states, however, California public colleges and universities have been prohibited from using affirmative action in college admissions since Proposition 209 was adopted in 1996. Enrollment of Black and Hispanic students and other minority groups dropped precipitously in the more selective public schools in California after the proposition was enacted. Since then it has rebounded at least somewhat. For example, Black enrollment at U.C.L.A. fell to 3.43 percent in 1998 from 7 percent before Proposition 209 was adopted. By 2019, it had increased to 5.98 percent. (California’s population is 6.5 percent Black.) As a private school, Stanford did not fall under the Proposition 209 requirements. Stanford said in a statement that it had taken steps to comply with the Supreme Court decision and that it was “committed to fulfilling our obligations under the law.” The statement added that the school had not received any details about the investigation from the Justice Department.The University of California system was not immediately available to comment on the Justice Department announcement. The review follows a lawsuit filed in February accusing the University of California system of violating protections against racial discrimination in admissions. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Students Against Racial Discrimination, which was organized by a persistent critic of affirmative action, asked for a court order requiring that the system select students “in a colorblind manner,” to “eliminate the corrupt and unlawful race and sex preferences that subordinate academic merit to so-called diversity considerations.” Separately on Thursday, the Department of Health and Human Services said it was launching an investigation into accusations that a “major medical school” in California had used discriminatory admissions practices. It did not specify which school.

The Trump administration has increased the number of students and academics it is seeking to deport in recent days, a new front in its efforts to restrict immigration. About 800 international students have been stripped of their visas, according to universities and media reports. In late March, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that the administration was revoking visas daily. The White House has asserted that some of these immigrants threaten national security, though some legal experts have said the administration is trampling free speech rights. In the vast majority of cases, however, immigration officials have not provided reasons. The identities of most of the students have not been publicized. Some immigration lawyers said it appeared that many were pursued because they had broken laws, such as by driving under the influence.Here is what we know about the students the Trump administration is seeking to deport. Who is being targeted? The affected students are, for the most part, in the United States with visas that allow foreign nationals to enter for full-time study. A handful have green cards, making them lawful permanent residents. These students attend schools across the country, both private and public, including Arizona State University, the University of California and New York University. While some students have been involved in pro-Palestinian activism, it appears a majority are not. Some of the visa revocations seem to be related to legal infractions in the students’ past. “This is totally unprecedented,” said Fuji Whittenburg, an immigration lawyer in Calabasas, Calif., who is representing some of the students. She added, “A brush with law enforcement that didn’t necessarily result in an arrest or a conviction is all it took.” Ms. Whittenburg said that one of her clients got a D.U.I. while studying in the United States more than a decade ago. When he applied for a second visa more recently, he disclosed the charge to U.S. consular authorities and was ultimately approved to pursue further studies. Editors’ Picks What a New American Citizen Learned on Route 66 Simple Sandals Are Always a Good Investment Is ‘Reef Safe’ Sunscreen Really Better? This month, that visa was suddenly revoked.

Every spring, well-known and accomplished figures deliver commencement addresses at college campuses around the country, offering graduates advice, wisdom and inspiration as they embark on their next chapter. Students graduating from the University of Maryland in May will be sent off into the world with a croaky message from a green, lanky puppet. Kermit the Frog is this year’s commencement speaker, the university announced on Wednesday. Kermit may not be well known for his soaring rhetoric, but he has spoken publicly about the challenges he has overcome to reach “the top of the frog heap” in his life, which began in a swamp before he moved to Hollywood and became a star. Perhaps one of his most valued contributions to the American cultural canon, the song “Bein’ Green,” details his journey to accept his bright visage, even though it means spending each day as “the color of the leaves.” Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “I am thrilled that our graduates and their families will experience the optimism and insight of the world-renowned Kermit the Frog at such a meaningful time in their lives,” Darryll J. Pines, president of the University of Maryland, said of Kermit, known for his leading roles on “The Muppet Show” and “Sesame Street.” The university revealed Kermit’s graduation ceremony role in a video that did not initially identify him, but touted the unknown’s speakers credentials as an international superstar, best-selling author, environmental advocate, Peabody award winner and “friend to all creatures.” The world’s most famous amphibian then appears onscreen, flashing a big smile: “Uh, I guess it’s me,” Kermit said. The commencement speech on May 21, 2025, will be a homecoming of sorts for Kermit, whose creator, Jim Henson, graduated from the university in 1960 and where a bronze statue of Kermit and Mr. Henson sits in a campus garden. Mr. Henson made the first version of Kermit out of his mother’s old coat and a pingpong ball cut in half for eyes. Mr. Henson, who died in 1990, was the original voice behind Kermit, often referring to the slightly snarky but wise frog as his alter ego. “Nothing could make these feet happier than to speak at the University of Maryland,” Kermit said in a statement. “I just know the class of 2025 is going to leap into the world and make it a better place, so if a few encouraging words from a frog can help, then I’ll be there!” Editors’ Picks Is There a Least Bad Alcohol? His Life Savings Were Mailed to Him by Paper Check. Now, It’s Gone. How to Manage Your Blood Sugar With Exercise Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Much of Kermit’s wisdom and encouragement has been conveyed through song. Diana Ross, Frank Sinatra and Willie Nelson are among the dozens of artists who have covered his tracks, including “Rainbow Connection,” which urges people to follow their dreams. “Who said that every wish would be heard and answered /When wished on the morning star? / Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it /Look what it’s done so far.” Although commencement addresses are often given by well-known people, colleges have at times thought outside the box. Last year, D’Youville University in Buffalo had an A.I. robot speak at its commencement, drawing mixed reactions from students, faculty members and other attendees. And this won’t be Kermit’s first rodeo. In 1996, he delivered a commencement address to the graduating class of Southampton College, then part of Long Island University, where he received an honorary doctorate of amphibious letters for his helping raise environmental awareness. Many graduating students decorated their gowns with green stickers that read “Kermit ’96,” The New York Times reported, though not all students were thrilled to see a puppet at the podium. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Still, if the past is any indication, Kermit will deliver a positive message to the University of Maryland Terps. At the 1996 commencement, Kermit’s speech included a few ribbits, which he translated for the audience. “May success and a smile always be yours,” The Washington Post reported he said, “even when you’re knee deep in the sticky muck of life.”

A doctoral student at the University of Alabama was detained by federal immigration authorities, the university said in a statement on Wednesday, one of more than half a dozen students who have been targeted by the Trump administration in recent weeks. The student was not named by the school, but online records from Immigration and Customs Enforcement indicate that Alireza Doroudi, an Iranian citizen, was detained by the agency. Alex House, a spokeswoman with the University of Alabama, which is in Tuscaloosa, Ala., said that the student was detained off campus. It was not clear why the student was targeted, and U.S. immigration officials did not immediately respond to questions on Wednesday evening. Earlier this month, Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia University graduate and leader of pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations who has permanent U.S. residency, was arrested by federal immigration officers in New York. Though he has not been charged with any crime, the Trump administration has described comments made by Mr. Khalil as antisemitic and argued that he should be deported. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT And on Tuesday, Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish doctoral student at Tufts University in Massachusetts who had a student visa, was taken into federal custody. Sunil Kumar, the president of Tufts University, wrote in an email to students, staff and faculty members on Tuesday night that Tufts administrators had been told the student’s visa had been terminated. The Crimson White, a student-run newspaper at the University of Alabama, first reported on the detainment of Mr. Doroudi on Wednesday afternoon. According to a LinkedIn page listed as belonging to Mr. Doroudi, he studied mechanical engineering at the University of Alabama and specialized in metallurgical engineering, which focuses on metals used to produce industrial products. Last year, he wrote on LinkedIn that he was “thrilled to share” his first published paper as a Ph.D. researcher.

It was chicken tenders night at Yale’s chapter of Hillel, the Jewish student group, and the basement dining hall was packed with boisterous, hungry students attracted by overflowing vats of kosher fried chicken and vegan mac and cheese. Some students kissed the mezuza on the way in. Others were not even Jewish, but came for the food and companionship, a sign of the pluralism that Hillel — the dominant Jewish campus organization in the United States — says it embraces. Yet under the surface, there were signs of strain, after months of divisive protests on campus over the war in Gaza. A silent question hung in the air, several students said: “Which side are you on?” Few American organizations have been touched by clashes over the war quite the way Hillel has. The movement, founded in 1923 at the University of Illinois, now has chapters at 850 colleges and universities around the world, from highly selective private schools like Yale to big state universities like Texas A&M. The Hillel movement, including Hillel International and the campus Hillel chapters, had $200 million in revenue in 2023, received from tens of thousands of donors. Hillel centers are where college students go to cement their sense of Jewish identity, or to discover it. Its slogan is “all kinds of Jewish,” and it aims to be welcoming to all. But as the conflict in Gaza continues, some Jewish students believe that Hillel is not critical enough of the Israeli government’s conduct of the war, and too defensive in its support of Zionism, a belief in the right of Jews to a Jewish state in their ancestral land of Israel. Hillel, for its part, is unapologetic. “Hillel as an institution has been and remains committed to the support of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, that fulfills the right of Jewish self-determination in an ancestral homeland,” Adam Lehman, Hillel’s chief executive officer, said in an interview. The shock of the Hamas attack of Oct. 7, 2023, against Israel has moved many Jewish students to explore what it means to be Jewish, fueling significant growth in interest in Hillel on campuses around the world. During the 2023-24 school year, as the conflict in the Middle East escalated, a record 180,000 students participated in Hillel activities at least once, 12,000 more than the year before, according to the organization. There was also an uptick in the number of “super-users,” who visited Hillel at least six times. Over the last year and half, though, the solidarity that came with that identity has cracked.The fissures can be felt in public life and in synagogues. And the division among Jews more generally is playing out among Jews on campus, as some complain that Hillel is too aligned with Israel, while others say that it is too open to critics of Israel. Many students find it hard to divorce themselves from Hillel completely, especially in this time when they may not feel safe expressing their Jewish faith and identity outside their own community. Some students, like Emanuelle Sippy, a senior at Princeton, look for a middle ground. She still goes to Hillel for prayer services, meals and lectures. But in the search for a more congenial left-wing political environment, she also helped to revive a small rival group, the Alliance of Jewish Progressives, on her campus. “There is a group of people — very close friends, people I respect and admire — who are fighting battles within these institutions like Hillel,” she said. “They might be showing up to events. Hillel might be counting them. It doesn’t mean they don’t have criticisms.” This is not the first time that there has been a schism among students at Hillel. Students at Harvard launched an Open Hillel movement in 2012, in protest against the parent organization’s policy against partnering with anti-Israel groups. In December 2013, students at Swarthmore Hillel declared themselves the first “Open Hillel” chapter in the nation, vowing to promote open inquiry, regardless of ideology.The current ideological split feels sharper, as campus protests for and against Israel have led to arrests, suspensions and lawsuits. When it comes to the campus Hillel, “a lot of students don’t feel comfortable going in for political reasons,” said Danya Dubrow-Compaine, a senior and a co-founder of Yale Jews for Ceasefire. There is also a growing generation gap. In a Pew survey conducted in February 2024, 38 percent of adults under 30 years old said Israel’s reasons for fighting Hamas were valid, down from 41 percent two years earlier. That compares with 78 percent of people 65 and older who said the same, up several points from the earlier survey. Elijah Bacal, a sophomore who is an organizer for Yale Jews for Ceasefire, said the institutional leadership of the Slifka Center, as Yale’s Hillel is known, has been slow to adapt. “I think there is a real, honestly, just like an out-of-touchness,” Mr. Bacal said.Hillel is still one of the first places Jewish students go when arriving on campus, to meet others, do homework and enjoy a meal with friends. “I was looking for a place where my intellectual life wouldn’t be siloed into the classroom, but would spill out to a broader community,” said Medad Lytton, a Yale senior. After Oct. 7, he said, he “felt a strong sense of peoplehood.” A singing circle at Slifka helped him connect with others to express his grief. “It’s kind of a second home for me,” he said of the center. Nili Fox, a junior at Washington University in St. Louis, was brought up in a religious Jewish family, and sought out Hillel as soon as she arrived on campus. After Oct. 7, Hillel was her “rock,” she said. “It has really been helpful to know that whenever I feel uncomfortable I have a place where I was supported and loved, no matter what,” Ms. Fox said. Other students are dismayed by what they perceive as Hillel’s uncritical view of Israel in the face of a complicated and morally challenging reality. Some students object to Hillel houses flying the Israeli flag, which they see as a symbol of a nation that has, from Ms. Sippy’s perspective, committed war crimes.Uri Cohen, the executive director of the Slifka Center at Yale, says the flag represents Hillel’s values. “There are some who don’t come because it crosses a line for them, and there are many who come,” Mr. Cohen said. “Slifka is very clear. We are a Zionist institution. We are also not checking anybody’s credentials at the door.” In January, Yale Hillel hosted a talk by Naftali Bennett, a former Israeli army commando, defense minister and prime minister, who was once considered a protégé of Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s current prime minister. Many Jewish students objected to Mr. Bennett’s hawkish politics. (At a later talk at Harvard Business School, Mr. Bennett joked that he would give exploding pagers to people who disagreed with him, according to The Harvard Crimson.) Mr. Bacal, the organizer with Yale Jews for Ceasefire, helped lead a peaceful protest against Mr. Bennett in the lobby of the Slifka Center. He did not contest Mr. Bennett’s right to speak, Mr. Bacal said, but he did not see why the event had been held in a spiritual place, a chapel where students went to pray and that contained an ark with a Torah in it. “I think it’s a real shame, because the Jewish community at college should welcome and represent all Jews on campus to the best of its ability, no matter where they are coming from,” he said.Another student, Netanel Crispe, a senior, said that he objected not to the speaker but to Hillel’s having allowed the protest against him. Mr. Crispe said that Slifka staff stopped him and several others from filming the protest. He faulted Yale Hillel for trying “to play to both sides in a way that doesn’t reflect core values.” Mr. Cohen, Slifka’s director, defended the invitation the center extended to Mr. Bennett, noting that his talk drew 300 people to a space that only held 100. “We did it out of our love for Israel and our love for Zionism, and the opportunity of giving access for our students to an influential world leader,” he said. To illustrate Hillel’s dilemma, Mr. Bacal, the protest leader, recalled how honored he was to lead Shabbat services for the first time. His parents came to town to be there, and friends attended. But it took place around the time of the Naftali Bennett event, and one of his friends stayed away in protest. She told Mr. Bacal she did not feel comfortable stepping into Slifka that week. “I totally get that,” Mr. Bacal said.

Colleges are expecting what could be the largest freshman class ever this fall at a moment of extraordinary turmoil, as campuses face financial pressures from the federal government and political conflict over diversity and other cultural issues. Admissions processes, upended by the Supreme Court decision to ban affirmative action, have been revamped. Budget pressures and worries about financial aid and tuition loom for colleges and families alike. Campuses have been grappling with protests and the sanctity of academic freedom. And that was before President Trump’s return to power. After he took office in January, his administration almost immediately began a campaign to close the Education Department and stop billions of dollars from flowing to colleges. On campuses, universities are shutting down laboratories and confronting civil rights investigations over antisemitism. As about 3.9 million students earn their high school diplomas and many of them head to college, the changes could affect their experiences in big and small ways. Here’s how the commotion might touch students, their parents and anyone else around college campuses this year. Different schools, different problems The United States has close to 4,000 degree-granting colleges and universities that offer everything from associate’s degrees in nursing to doctorates in history. But challenges are just about everywhere in higher education right now. The kind of federal budget cuts that the Trump administration is pursuing could be the most damaging to universities where research is integral to the campus’s culture and structure. That includes places like the University of Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins University, but also schools like Kansas State University. Some have already announced layoffs or hiring freezes, and may be forced to rework their course offerings. It is unclear how much belt tightening there will be, and how it might affect undergraduates in the fall. Regional public universities often receive less attention but are very much the backbone of higher education for millions of people. They have not been as targeted by the Trump administration, but they still face fundamental challenges around state budget fights, increasing day-to-day costs and declining enrollments. On some campuses, students are finding reduced services and staffing, with fewer professors, diminished academic resources and buildings that are closed more frequently. Community colleges are generally far cheaper than their four-year counterparts and are still avoiding the biggest political fights around higher education; plenty of politicians, in fact, are pushing to make them free. But their troubles are deep and stubborn. Although some schools have reported enrollment growth for this semester, community colleges have suffered from slumped interest for years. Private colleges are a mixed bag. Many remain strong, if susceptible to criticism over their costs and political leanings. But dozens have closed in recent years, leaving students scrambling to find new academic homes. Is paying for college going to change? There is proposed change, and then there is actual change. Mr. Trump’s effort to dismantle the Education Department puts two federal programs in limbo: Pell Grants and student loans. Linda McMahon, the secretary of education, said during her confirmation hearing that she wanted to expand the Pell Grant program, which is for low-income students. It isn’t clear, however, which agency or entity would administer the grants if the Education Department were to go away. On Friday, Mr. Trump said that the Small Business Administration would “immediately” take over the federal student loan portfolio. The Student Borrower Protection Center called his idea “illegal, unserious, and a distraction.” Given the enormity of the loan program, any quick transfer seems highly unlikely. Until Congress or federal courts get involved — and both may happen before long — the application process for financial aid and loans won’t change. The FAFSA, short for Free Application for Federal Student Aid, has been working better so far this application season after a rough redesign of the application. But it’s not clear how recent Education Department layoffs will affect the process. The biggest wild card may be the colleges themselves and what sorts of grants and scholarships they’ll be giving out. Many schools are suspending hiring to save money and fretting over a possible decline in international students, who may fear coming to the United States right now. What isn’t clear is whether schools will ask students to pay more than they may have otherwise (because of concerns over budget hits from the loss of federal funding) or pay less (to get them to commit to coming in the first place). How campus culture is shifting Diversity, equity and inclusion programs had once seemed like a good idea to many universities, even a necessity, as they sought to increase their enrollments in a competitive landscape. But a backlash has driven state lawmakers to take up legislation to eliminate such programs, and now the Trump administration is also attacking them. Universities are responding in varying ways. Sometimes schools have simply renamed their D.E.I. operations. Other universities been more aggressive. In March 2024, the University of Florida fired its 13-member D.E.I. staff in response to a state ban, for example. On some campuses, students will very likely feel the differences. The University of Virginia pulled trainings on topics such as D.E.I. and microaggressions from its website. At the University of Houston, the campus newspaper announced that an L.G.B.T.Q. center was being shut after Texas banned diversity programming in colleges and universities. At the University of North Florida, an L.G.B.T.Q. center, a women’s center, an interfaith center and an intercultural center were all shuttered. At Missouri State University in January, students protested the elimination of an annual diversity conference as well as an “inclusive excellence” gala. There remain holdouts. In a recent meeting with the faculty Senate at Amherst College in Massachusetts, its president Michael Elliott called Mr. Trump’s orders ambiguous, and said that Amherst would make no cuts. Schools that have seen major protests over the war in Gaza could face blunt-force pressure from Washington to change discipline and other institutional policies related to protests, and even curriculum related to the Middle East. Republican efforts to curb diversity programming could extend into the classroom. Long before Mr. Trump began his second term, some states, including Florida, tried to sideline ideas from college curriculums that lawmakers considered left-leaning. That could lead to more limited course offerings that touch on race and gender. For now, the courses in Florida are still available but not required. Other efforts are in the works. A bill in Arizona, for example, would slash state funding for all state colleges if any instruction connected “contemporary American society” to ideas like whiteness or systemic racism. What does the affirmative action ban mean for students? The Supreme Court’s decision in 2023 to strike down race-conscious admissions has upended nearly 50 years of court precedent and university policies, and the effect on admissions especially at the nation’s most selective institutions may be unclear for years to come. Statistics are in for the class that entered in the fall, and they broadly show a decrease in the number of Black students enrolled. Some differences were stark, as at Harvard Law School, which enrolled 19 Black first-year students last fall, compared with 43 the year before. But there are some exceptions to the trend. And given the difficulty of comparing different counting methods across universities, officials have been reluctant to predict how the future will play out. Schools are trying to maintain diversity by stepping up financial aid and recruitment, particularly in rural areas. Several universities, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard, are offering free tuition for students whose families earn $200,000 and below. The court also left open the possibility that universities could consider race in the context of life challenges, especially as students presented them in application essays. But critics of affirmative action, like Students for Fair Admissions, which brought the Supreme Court case, are ready to challenge universities if they see any hint of any decisions based on race. Anti-affirmative action groups will also be scrutinizing measures like SAT scores, if they can get them, to see whether universities are using different standards for different races and ethnicities.