An MSU law professor, Adam Candeub, is credited for one chapter in Project 2025 focused on potential changes to the Federal Trade Commission.

Since its original publication in 2022, Democrats have pointed to Project 2025’s proposed reforms as a blueprint for what a potential second Trump presidency would look like. In response, Trump and other Republicans have distanced themselves from its content. Others have noted that several contributors to Project 2025 are former Trump administration officials.

The chapter most relevant to MSU is chapter 11, focused on reforming the Department of Education. Within the chapter, its author calls for abolishing the department, drastically cutting the availability of federal student loans and revamping university curriculums to serve “American interests.”

Chapter 11 of Project 2025, written by Lindsey Burke, opens with a straightforward mission statement: “Federal education policy should be limited and, ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated.”

Rolling back Title IX protections

Title IX is a federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in educational programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. Project 2025 calls for the next conservative administration to roll back current Title IX regulations to those established by Trump’s Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos.

The Biden administration’s rules, which only went into effect Aug. 1 of this year, added protections for non-binary and transgender students as well as eliminated the mandate for live hearings and cross-examination as parts of resolving Title IX complaints on college campuses. These regulations, writes Burke, “trample women’s and girls’ athletic opportunities and due process on campus.”

After rolling back Title IX regulations, Burke writes, the next administration should work with Congress to further amend Title IX with “additional insistence that ‘sex’ is properly understood as a fixed biological fact.” In doing this, it would be more difficult for non-binary and transgender students to file Title IX complaints when they’re discriminated against on the basis of their gender identity.

Additionally, Project 2025 calls for the Office of Civil Rights, the federal agency responsible for enforcing non-discrimination laws such as Title IX, to drop all ongoing investigations. According to the federal government, the Office of Civil Rights is currently conducting 22 investigations into MSU for potential violations. Seven of those cases are related to Title IX.

Privatizing student loans and closing college outreach programs

In chapter 11 of Project 2025, Burke also argues that the next conservative administration should “overhaul the federal student loan program for the benefit of taxpayers and students.” 

Burke recommends that all lending programs run by the federal government be privatized, meaning people would have to get their student loans from private lenders offering loans at market price. Project 2025 does specify that Pell grants, meant to assist low-income students in paying for school, should be preserved.

Many of the reforms outlined in chapter 11 are pursued in the name of cost-cutting, a recurring theme throughout Project 2025. Among the programs slated for elimination or privatization is GEAR UP, a college access initiative funded with federal dollars that helps disadvantaged students reach higher education.

At MSU, GEAR UP is carried out through the Office of College Access Initiatives which partners with local school districts to provide students with information on financial aid and college admissions. The program also helps prepare high school seniors for undergraduate education and offers some scholarships.

Burke recommends eliminating GEAR UP entirely, writing that “it is not the responsibility of the federal government to provide taxpayer dollars to create a pipeline from high school to college.”

Director of the Office of College Access Initiatives Stephanie Anthony said that by eliminating GEAR UP, the future administration would rob students of a valuable avenue to college. Anthony added that the students most affected would be those without the financial support to get them to college alone.

“The purpose of a program like GEAR UP is to, as much as possible, level the playing field so that every young person has an opportunity to excel, to learn and grow,” Anthony said. “To eliminate GEAR UP would take that opportunity away for students.”

Undoubtedly, Anthony said, the students GEAR UP serves would also be negatively affected by the privatization of student loans.

Changing curriculum to promote “American interests”

Near the end of chapter 11’s policy proposals, there is a call for Congress to “wind-down” area studies programs at universities across the nation. Area studies, which take the form of the International Studies and Programs at MSU, provide students and faculty with opportunities to learn about the world through programs such as the African Studies Center and Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies.

Project 2025 argues that these programs and the research they support have the ability to “run counter to (American) interests.” Rather than fund those programs, Burke writes, the next secretary of education should allocate at least 40% of funding to international business programs that teach about free market economics. 

Additionally, Project 2025 recommends that institutions, faculty and fellowship recipients should be required to certify that they intend to further serve those American interests.

In a statement to The State News, Vice Provost and Dean of International Studies and Programs (ISP) Steve Hanson defended the value of ISP’s academic offerings. By preparing students for global careers, sponsoring research across borders and making MSU more attractive for international faculty and students, Hanson wrote, ISP and the education it offers is “essential” to American interests.

“Global engagement allows MSU to effectively participate in solving complex challenges that transcend national borders,” Hanson wrote. “This approach benefits MSU, Michigan, and the U.S. while also contributing to global well-being and understanding.”

Further restrictions beyond higher education

Beyond the changes contained in chapter 11, Project 2025 also makes calls for potential policies that would affect students at MSU, namely restrictions on abortion access and the civil rights of LGBTQ+ students.

Project 2025 references the Comstock Act, an 1873 federal law that criminalizes the interstate mailing of “obscene, lewd, or lascivious” materials as well as “every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion.” Project 2025’s author argues that the next administration should use this law to prohibit the distribution of medications such as mifepristone and misoprostol, which are used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions.

Although Michigan passed a constitutional amendment protecting the right to abortion in 2022, it’s unclear how the federal government’s enforcement of the Comstock act would impact access to surgical and medical abortions in the state.

Additionally, the authors of Project 2025 make no attempt to disguise their disdain of transgender individuals. The book’s foreword, written by Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, describes the existence of transgender people as inherently pornographic, an argument meant to justify policies minimizing the visibility of transgender people in society.

Project 2025 recommends the future administration return to the Trump-era policy banning transgender individuals from serving in the military, fund studies proving the short-term and the long-term negative effects of gender affirming care and revoke anti-discrimination protections for transgender people in the workplace.

Why?

The policies envisioned in Project 2025 would impact the availability of student loans, the enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and alter the education students receive at MSU. Other proposed policies would affect students’ ability to obtain an abortion and strip current protections for transgender students.

The project’s authors provide a variety of justifications for the measures promoted, ranging from a need to dismantle a bloated, despotic federal government to restoring the “American family.” Sometimes the motive is as simple as cutting costs to save tax dollars.

For those whose jobs are connected to programs threatened with elimination, like Anthony, the motive for shuttering programs meant to expand access to education and create a more equitable society remains unknown.

“I have my own thoughts about it, but those are simply my personal thoughts, I personally don’t understand it,” said Anthony. “I mean, who really knows what lurks in the hearts and minds of men.”