Ariana Aboulafia is a fellow at Tech Policy Press.

President Trump wasted little time after his second inauguration in using the power of the Oval Office to target professors, students, and protestors on college campuses. Such attacks on academia are not particularly novel, with some conservative organizations and politicians targeting higher education for years as a proxy for other ideological battles, often under the guise of defending “free speech” on campuses. But the executive branch’s actions in 2025 have intensified their consequences. Cuts to funding for research labelled “woke,” and an onslaught of punitive measures directed at students who engage in pro-Palestine speech and lawsuits targeting elite institutions have quickly become commonplace.

In parallel, the administration began touting its commitment to investing in tech and artificial intelligence (AI), with a particular emphasis on “train[ing] the next generation of American AI researchers.” These two priorities are incongruous. By increasing political discord on college campuses, reducing funding, and chilling the speech of students and professors alike, the rhetoric and actions of this administration are inhibiting the education of the country’s future technology experts.

The December announcement that the State Department would vet H1B applicants to screen out anyone whose work history includes content moderation, trust and safety, or other roles that the Trump administration characterizes as “censorship” — along with their families — underscores these dynamics. These policies, particularly in the aggregate, are likely to discourage scholars and emerging technologists from understanding the role that technology plays in society, much less addressing its negative impacts.

This has had significant effects on students, administrators, and professors throughout this year. In particular, professors whose teaching and research focus on how tech affects marginalized communities (including people with disabilities) are facing significant challenges, including the disappearance of funding opportunities.

I spoke with four professors who specifically teach at the intersection of disability rights and technology about their experiences under the new administration thus far. These educators bring expertise not only in technology and disability rights, but also in topics such as bioethics, philosophy, data studies, and more. The interviews were conducted via Zoom, lightly edited for clarity, and highlighted below under four major themes: the importance of continuing to teach tech in context; concerns over funding; the impact of the administration’s policy and rhetoric on students; and a shared commitment to the work despite the mounting challenges.

The scholars interviewed include:

1. Rua Williams, PhD, Assistant Professor, Purdue University
2. Damien Patrick Williams, PhD, Assistant Professor, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
3. Ashley Shew, PhD, Professor, Virginia Tech
4. Ly Xīnzhèn M. Zhǎngsūn Brown, J.D., Assistant Teaching Professor, Georgetown University

You can’t teach tech in a silo

One of the most commonly expressed perspectives from each expert was that, despite the administration’s distaste for all things “DEI,” it is nearly impossible to teach about technology without also including perspectives on how tech impacts people differently depending on a range of factors, including their identities. From my conversations with these professors, it seems clear that to truly cultivate the next generation of AI experts, students need educators who are willing to grapple with tech’s impact on marginalized communities.

Ly Xīnzhèn M. Zhǎngsūn Brown:

When we talk about and teach technology in the classroom, we need to teach critical perspectives and the skills that students need to have to analyze how they are using technologies, as well as what technologies we should be creating, how we should be regulating them, and who, of course, should be designing and using those technologies.

Ashley Shew:

It's related to how we're met in the world, and even like what technologies were offered, what things are thought appropriate for us, how we're read as human beings. So I don't see any way not to talk about it.

Damien Williams:

One of the most pervasive and insidious forms of marginalization that shows up in our society is ableism… and all of that makes its way into the technologies that we build and the technologies that enable what we think of as good lives, as ‘useful’ and ‘meaningful’ lives. The more we can actually analyze, deconstruct, really think clearly about the ways that technology gets created, gets designed, gets conceptualized, and how that ableism often makes its way into it, the more we can do to untangle it, the more we can do to prevent that harm from making its way into it, the more we can do to deconstruct it within ourselves on a broader level.

Funding remains a concern

Many academics rely on federal funding to support their research. But the Trump administration has placed new restrictions on which projects qualify for federal funding, with a particular focus on reducing or entirely cutting funding to researchers whose work may focus on marginalized communities. This can include work on responsible or ethical use of technology, including AI – a tension several experts noted, given the administration’s supposed goal of encouraging AI research.

Rua Williams:

Yes, I've had my funding impacted both by direct cuts and also by loss of programs… a lot of funding impacts are actually because the things that we would have applied to are also disappearing. So part of it is loss of opportunity, [as opposed to] direct cuts or even cancellations.

Damien Williams:

I work with a couple of different centers and groups throughout the university, and funding lines that we were up for disappeared before we even knew whether we had gotten that funding or not. I know a number of people were in a worse position of having been granted that funding, and then had that funding put in a state of limbo or outright rescinded, after the fact.

Students are paying attention

The effects of the Trump administration’s campus crackdown have been felt not only by teachers but also by students at all levels across institutions. Many international students may be concerned about traveling home for holiday breaks; others may be internalizing the administration’s rhetoric and becoming less willing to engage with material that centers the impacts of tech on disabled people.

Ashley Shew:

Spring of 2025 was the first semester I've ever had people walk out in the middle of lecture. And it happened twice this semester, both times when I was reading aloud from the work of other disabled people.…two different men in my class, who left mid-lecture. I've never had that happen until this year.

Damien Williams:

I have noticed my students driving conversations in wanting to talk about the changes in society…[and] how different experiences show up in technology, show up in data sometimes…What I have seen over the past year is more and more students bringing their concerns into class.

All hope is not lost

While this administration’s actions seem to undermine the research and development of responsible and ethical technology, the role of institutions, educators, administrators, and students remains vital in pushing back. The professors I spoke with — and so many others throughout the nation — have remained steadfast in their commitment to teaching about technology in ways that are honest and intersectional.

Ly Xīnzhèn M. Zhǎngsūn Brown:

I believe that it is our responsibility as educators to give our students a solid foundation in understanding not just how to use technologies, but also to think about the bigger questions of ethical use and development of those technologies, why those questions matter, and what type of society we are imagining based on the types of technologies that we desire and build.

Rua Williams:

There are always things that you can do to not betray your own moral convictions…I do still wish for people to recognize that they do not need to just roll over.

Like so many others, the educators I interviewed for this piece remain committed to their vocations, and to the belief that the future can be better than the present — as long as we are willing to continue to work for it.