Massachusetts Institute of Technology formally rejected the Trump administration’s proposed higher-education compact, making it the first university to publicly decline the agreement. MIT President Sally Kornbluth told Education Secretary Linda McMahon the compact contained provisions that would limit institutional independence and politicize research funding, arguing that scientific support should be awarded on merit. The university noted it already meets many of the compact’s standards but said other clauses would threaten free expression and institutional autonomy. MIT’s public rebuff has catalyzed a broader conversation on campuses that were approached by the administration. Faculty leaders and academic lawyers have framed the compact as a potential federal overreach into admissions, hiring and campus speech. MIT’s stance gives other presidents and trustees a concrete template to reference as they weigh faculty, legal and political risks. The development is immediate: colleges named in the White House outreach now face compressed timelines to respond while balancing federal-research dependencies, donor relations, and faculty governance. University counsel and academic leaders are scrutinizing specific compact clauses (caps on international students; coded audits of campus viewpoints) for constitutional vulnerability and operational impact.