Higher education has found itself shackled in the political crosshairs in the United States. Ironically enough, the very nation renowned for imparting top-notch education is grappling with an opaque future. Former US President Barack Obama’s recent address at Hamilton College was not just a speech but a clarion call. With poise and precision, he posed a question beyond the corridors of college. As the Trump administration tightens its financial grip on elite universities—cutting off funds, issuing probes, and accusing institutions of bias—Obama’s words cut through the noise like the sounding of an alarm. As education in America seems to be in jeopardy, a question that takes centre stage is: What, in the face of intimidation, is truly worth defending? The stakes are not merely fiscal; they are foundational.

Endowments as shields

Obama did not mince words. Universities, he said, must look in the mirror: Are they upholding their values, or buckling under political pressure? If their principles are intact, then it’s time to put their money where their mission is. “That’s why we got this big endowment,” he quipped, reminding institutions that endowments aren’t museum pieces—they’re shields in times of siege.
Lawrence Summers, Obama’s former Treasury Secretary and a past president of Harvard, echoed the sentiment. Writing in The New York Times, Summers argued that even donor-restricted funds could, in a genuine emergency, be reallocated. “Believe me,” he wrote, “When I say that ways can be found in an emergency to deploy even parts of the endowment that have been earmarked by their donors for other uses.”

Cancel culture, or conversation?

But Obama’s message did not only take government as the target audience. He turned his gaze inward, challenging universities to revisit how they handle dissenting speech. In an era when controversial speakers are screamed at or disinvited, Obama reminded students that freedom is a two-way street, it is a dialogue and not a monologue. “Even if I find their ideas obnoxious,” he wrote on Medium, “You let them speak—and then you tell them why they’re wrong. That’s how you win the argument.”
His stance struck a nerve, as many students and faculty across the nation wrestle with where to draw the line between inclusion and ideological intolerance. The freedom to speak, Obama insisted, must not be mistaken for freedom from being challenged.

Federal pressure mounts

The backlash against universities is not unfolding in a vacuum. Columbia University recently saw $400 million in grants and contracts vanish. The University of Pennsylvania had $175 million suspended. Harvard is under federal review for $9 billion in affiliations. To many, it feels less like oversight and more like punishment.

Principles over profit

Obama’s words have turned into a litmus test for leadership. Brown, Princeton, and other elite institutions have begun to speak out—but is it enough? The former president warned that playing it safe is no longer a viable strategy. In times like these, neutrality is complicity. Whether in university boards or law firm boardrooms, the choice is the same: protect your principles or risk becoming a cautionary tale.
Obama has advised legal professionals to stick to their principles also facing political heat even if it costs the business. The message spelled out in black and white. When the ground begins to shift, the only way to remain standing is to be rooted in something deeper than convenience.

Safeguarding the soul of the university

In the final reckoning, Obama’s challenge is less about politics and more about purpose. It’s about courage under fire and the ability of institutions—academic or otherwise—to hold the line when it matters most.
The test now is not survival but integrity. Because freedom, as history teaches, is not lost in a single blow. It erodes silently when fear goes unchallenged and values are left undefended. The moment to take a stand is not tomorrow. It is now.