Trump Administration Allegedly Interferes with Fulbright Board, Leading to Their Resignation
The Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board, a bipartisan body mandated by Congress to ensure the non-political and non-ideological character of the Fulbright program, experienced a mass resignation of 11 out of its 12 members in June 2025. The primary reason for this dramatic move was the unprecedented political interference by the Trump administration in the scholarship selection process.
Established in 1946 by Senator J. William Fulbright and formalized by the Fulbright-Hays Act, signed into law by President John F. Kennedy, the Fulbright program promotes academic freedom, free speech, diplomacy, and international cooperation. Since its inception, the Fulbright Board has held final authority for approving scholarship recipients, a responsibility designed to maintain the program's independent and bipartisan nature.
However, the Trump administration reportedly rejected at least 200 selected candidates for the 2025-2026 academic year and initiated an “unauthorized review process” for over 1,200 foreign recipients planning to come to the U.S. The board characterized these actions as illegal, impermissible under the law, harmful to U.S. national interests, and compromising the Fulbright program’s integrity. They asserted these moves conflicted with the program’s long-standing bipartisan mission and values.
Among the resigning members was David Price, a former congressman, who publicly described the interference as "distorted on political grounds" and a threat to the program’s core values of free academic inquiry and international exchange. Additional reports emphasize that the Trump administration’s rejection decisions targeted applicants who proposed work related to diversity or climate change, revealing a political motivation behind the vetoes.
The resignation of the Fulbright board is a response to the administration's consistent ignoring of the board's requests to follow the law. The board hopes that Congress, the courts, and future boards can prevent the administration's efforts to degrade, dismantle, or eliminate the program. The board's resignation statement emphasizes the importance of institutions and the rule of law in America and expresses concern that the administration's actions could harm America's credibility abroad.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat from New Hampshire, stated that the resignation will change the quality of Fulbright programming. The board's resignation statement in full can be read here. The erosion of the Fulbright program, the board believes, weakens America and its national security interests.
The State Department manages the Fulbright program, and the bipartisan Fulbright Board was mandated by Congress to be a check on the executive and to ensure that students, researchers, and educators are not subjected to political favoritism. Injecting politics and ideological mandates into the Fulbright program, according to the board, violates the law established by Congress. The administration's actions, the board believes, contradict the statute and are antithetical to the Fulbright mission.
The board's resignation statement was made nearly eight decades after the establishment of the Fulbright program, a testament to the gravity of the situation and the board's commitment to upholding the program's principles. The resignation is not taken lightly, as they fear legitimizing unlawful actions. The board hopes that their resignation will serve as a call to action for those who value the importance of academic freedom, international cooperation, and the rule of law.
- The Fulbright board, in their resignation statement, emphasized the importance of academic freedom, free speech, diplomacy, and international cooperation in the context of their watch over the Fulbright program.
- The board's resignation was prompted by the Trump administration's interference in the scholarship selection process, which they viewed as a threat to the program's long-standing bipartisan mission and values.
- Reports suggest that the administration's rejection decisions targeted applicants who proposed work related to diversity or climate change, signifying a political motivation behind the vetoes.
- The board's resignation is not a light decision, as they fear legitimizing unlawful actions and compromising the program’s integrity.
- The board's resignation statement also expresses concern that the administration's actions could harm America’s credibility abroad, affecting not only its general news status but also its culture, entertainment, war-and-conflicts, policy-and-legislation, and politics coverage.
