The Trump administration has shifted its methodology for influencing higher education, moving from targeted institutional investigations toward the implementation of systemic federal regulations.

川普政府改變了影響高等教育的方法，從針對單一機構的調查，轉向實施系統性的聯邦規管。

The administration's previous strategy focused on the initiation of numerous investigations into specific campuses, a tactic characterized by former Education Department official Catherine Lhamon as performative. However, judicial interventions—specifically those preventing funding reductions at Harvard and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)—and a depletion of civil rights legal personnel have necessitated a strategic pivot. Consequently, the administration is now pursuing the codification of its policy priorities through the formal rulemaking process, which allows for the establishment of federal law without congressional approval.

政府之前的策略集中於針對特定校園發起大量調查，前教育部官員 Catherine Lhamon 將此策略形容為「表演性」。然而，由於司法干預——特別是防止哈佛大學與加州大學洛杉磯分校 (UCLA) 資金削減的裁決——以及民權法律專業人員的短缺，使得策略必須轉向。因此，政府目前正透過正式的規則制定程序，將其政策優先事項法制化，這使得在無需國會批准的情況下即可制定聯邦法律。

Central to this regulatory shift is the proposal to modify the accreditation process, requiring that institutions demonstrate 'intellectual diversity.' Furthermore, the Office of Management and Budget and the General Services Administration have proposed mandates ensuring that federal grants do not support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives or concepts that contradict the biological sex binary. While some academic leaders, such as Ted Mitchell of the American Council on Education, suggest this transition provides a structured framework for dialogue, others, including the American Association of University Professors, report a chilling effect on academic expression and faculty autonomy.

這次規管轉型的核心在於擬修改認證程序，要求機構證明其具備「思想多樣性」。此外，管理與預算局以及總務管理局已提出強制要求，確保聯邦撥款不支援多樣性、公平與包容 (DEI) 倡議，或與生物性別二元論相抵觸的概念。雖然部分學術領袖（如美國教育委員會的 Ted Mitchell）認為此轉型為對話提供了結構化框架，但其他人士（包括美國大學教授協會）則報告稱，這對學術表達與教職人員的自主權產生了寒蟬效應。

Concurrent with these systemic changes, the Department of Justice (DoJ) has intensified its focus on admissions practices. Following determinations that Yale and UCLA medical schools engaged in illegal racial preferences, the DoJ has commenced investigations into 15 additional medical schools to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. This effort is part of a broader initiative to eliminate the use of race in admissions, despite Supreme Court guidance permitting the holistic evaluation of an applicant's personal experiences. This focus on data-intensive admissions cases accounts for the observed decrease in the volume of general campus investigations compared to the previous calendar year.

與這些系統性變革同時進行的，是司法部 (DoJ) 加強了對招生做法的關注。在判定耶魯大學與 UCLA 醫學院存在非法種族偏好後，司法部已對另外 15 所醫學院啟動調查，以確保符合《民權法》第六條。儘管最高法院的指引允許對申請人的個人經驗進行整體評估，但此舉仍是旨在消除招生中種族因素之更廣泛計劃的一部分。由於對這類數據密集型招生案件的關注，導致與上一曆年相比，一般校園調查的數量有所下降。

The federal government has transitioned from a model of individual institutional confrontation to a systemic regulatory framework aimed at eliminating DEI policies and race-conscious admissions.

聯邦政府已從單一機構對抗模式，轉型為一套系統性規管框架，旨在消除 DEI 政策與考慮種族的招生做法。