Editor’s Note: The following excerpt is from an article originally published by Diogenes In Exile on May 5, 2025. With edits to match MTC’s style guidelines, it is cross-posted here with permission.
It is high noon, and the dust is swirling between higher education accreditors and the executive branch of the U.S. government. The president has drawn first with an Executive Order (EO) released on 23 April 2025. In that EO, President Trump has called out the failure of accreditation.
Wanted: Accreditation’s Failures
Trump cites the routine approval of low-quality colleges and universities. He points to low graduation rates and the enormous debt left in their wake as signs that these organizations are not fit for purpose. He goes on to focus on their abuse of power, injecting “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) ideology into the curriculum.
The EO continues, criticizing how many degree programs leave students saddled with debt for jobs that are low paying. Social workers and counselors take note: some places of higher education, like Northwestern University, are charging upwards of $132,000—$22,304 per quarter for six quarters—for the master’s degree required to practice a career with average annual earnings between $46k and $65k.
The arithmetic speaks for itself.
Cartels of Credentialing
Also highlighted is how many accreditors are monopoly providers in their domain of focus. The American Bar Association (ABA), Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP), Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), and the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) are four such monopoly agencies, all of which are using their power to demand Critical Social Justice-based training.
With professional training in law, therapy, social work and medicine all ideologically captured, that represents a huge influence on the future direction of the country.
This has become a familiar tune among those pushing for reform. Now it has the weight of the federal government behind it.
The EO’s provisions to hold accreditors accountable include revoking, suspending, or monitoring the accrediting authority of these bodies. How that will play out for monopoly accreditors, as noted above, is unclear. Federal law still requires accreditation approval for Pell Grants, student loans, and other government monies. This could present an opportunity for groups that organize a rival quickly. For students, it may mean a period of limbo should accreditors fail to make adjustments.
Currently, the ABA has already suspended its standard as it works on edits in response to Attorney General Pam Bondi’s 28 February letter calling the institution out for “unlawful race and sex discrimination under the guise of ‘diversity’ mandates.” Should that affect the future of students already working on their degrees is anyone’s guess.
The New Sheriffs in Town
In this new realignment, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education, with the input of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, are empowered to take action to end discrimination in medical schools and other health-related education bodies that was required by accreditors under the banner of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
With full follow-up, accreditors may then be suspended or terminated as needed to bring medical schools and other educational bodies taking federal funds into compliance with the law, as the ABA is already grappling with.
On the other hand, though bold in its language, the EO’s enforcement could face procedural hurdles and legal opposition from long-established accreditation bodies.
High Stakes Future
The last part of the EO reorients the mission of accreditation toward student benefit. That is defined as high-quality, high-value, non-discriminatory programs, lowering barriers to advanced degrees and credentials, promoting viewpoint diversity, abiding by the Constitution and other laws, and eliminating credential inflation.
To make that a reality, the Secretary of Education is tasked with approving more accreditors, tracking outcomes without referencing identity markers, promptly investigating Title IX and civil rights violations, beginning an experimental site to advance innovation in higher education, updating processes to streamline changing accreditors, reviewing accreditors, including through the use of technology, and making the entire process more efficient and transparent…
Continue reading this article here and follow Suzannah Alexander on X.
Image: “Donald Trump” by Gage Skidmore on Flickr
I’d like to see the anti-trust laws employed.