All 12 members of the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board resigned on June 11, 2025, accusing the Trump administration of unlawfully overriding merit‑based award decisions and threatening the program’s integrity.
At a Glance
- All 12 board members resigned in protest of alleged interference in Fulbright selections.
- The board claims around 200 approved grants for U.S. professors were canceled and 1,200 foreign awardees are under “unauthorized review.”
- Established in 1946, Fulbright annually awards approximately 8,000–9,000 scholarships across 160+ countries.
- The board says actions breach the Fulbright‑Hays Act and jeopardize U.S. academic credibility abroad.
- Key lawmakers, including Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, warned the resignations could damage U.S. global educational leadership.
Interference and Fallout
The Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board alleges that Trump-era State Department officials, under Secretary Marco Rubio, canceled 200 Fulbright grants for U.S. professors already approved for 2025 and placed 1,200 foreign recipients under review. These reviews were reportedly triggered by the awardees’ academic topics, which the board argues is a violation of legal and ethical standards.
According to Politico’s coverage, the board contends these actions undermine its statutory authority under the Fulbright-Hays Act, which mandates nonpartisan, merit-based decision-making in Fulbright selections.
Impact on U.S. Diplomacy and Academia
Since its creation in 1946, the Fulbright Program has become a key pillar of U.S. public diplomacy, sending nearly 400,000 scholars and students abroad and hosting an equal number in return. Alumni include Nobel Prize winners, cabinet officials, and heads of state.
Lawmakers such as Senator Jeanne Shaheen have warned that politicizing Fulbright threatens not just academic independence, but also the U.S.’s long-standing leadership in global education and cultural exchange.
Institutional and Legal Pushback
The resigning board members have called on Congress and the courts to intervene, asserting that their legal mandate under the Fulbright-Hays Act has been violated. They argue that failure to uphold this mandate risks long-term damage to America’s academic credibility and soft power abroad.
The Associated Press reports that the State Department dismissed the resignations as partisan, while the White House and Secretary Rubio’s office have described them as a “political stunt.”
What Comes Next
- Congressional hearings may be convened if lawmakers pursue accountability over the board’s legal concerns.
- Judicial review could determine if the administration’s actions violated the Fulbright-Hays Act.
- The resignations could accelerate broader scrutiny of international education policies, such as recent visa and student visa reviews.
Bottom line: The Fulbright Board’s resignation highlights a profound clash between academic autonomy and political control, raising urgent questions about U.S. soft power and democratic norms.
