Trinity Weighs Impact of “Big Beautiful Bill” as Students Return to Campus

Iqra Athar

Executive News Editor

On July 4, 2025, Donald Trump signed the “Big Beautiful Bill,” a law that reshapes federal policy on higher education by capping loan programs, revising Pell eligibility and raising taxes on some college endowments. Last semester, Trinity joined more than 500 institutions in signing a public letter rebuking the administration’s overreach in higher education. This fall is the first semester when students, families and offices on campus are beginning to feel how the law translates into aid decisions, anxiety and institutional choices. The Tripod, in conversation with individuals on campus, explored how these changes are being felt at Trinity and what responses may lie ahead.

For many students the most striking feature has been the speed and uncertainty of change. Ari M. Martinez ‘27 recalled expecting drawn out debate rather than immediate enforcement. “Once Trump came into office again, it felt like it was just enforced overnight,” Martinez said. She pointed to fear among international friends, some of whom avoid protests or even student club photos. “They’re worried about ICE retaliation,” Martinez explained, linking federal immigration policy with a chilling effect on campus expression. At the same time, financial questions loom. “If a school like Harvard can lose millions, what happens to us?” Martinez asked, noting that even a relatively small disruption could threaten Trinity’s stability. 

Administrators emphasize that the College has tried to insulate families from the sharpest effects even as demand for aid rises. Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid Matthew Hyde explained that Trinity relies primarily on its own budget rather than federal allocations. “We’re not as beholden to the federal government as some are,” he said, pointing to $80 to $85 million distributed annually in institutional aid. Still, Hyde acknowledged that “at this price point in this high-price/high-discount landscape, more and more families have the need for support.” Trinity meets full demonstrated need for lower income students while making the College accessible to middle-income families through a mix of need-based and merit awards. He reported that the admit rate remained steady at about 29 percent while the share of international students was trimmed to a 10 to 12 percent target after briefly exceeding 15 percent. Hyde also noted last year’s reinstatement of the CSS Profile requirement, an additional financial aid form used alongside the FAFSA, which reshaped some aid packages regardless of the new law. “We engaged hundreds of families in conversations,” he said, describing adjustments made when additional context was warranted. 

Faculty warn that the bill’s provisions signal deeper structural shifts. Professor Ibrahim Shikaki, Associate Professor of Economics described it as “a typical austerity policy” cutting social spending while directing new resources to immigration enforcement and policing. He cited Congressional Budget Office estimates showing higher income families gaining about $12,000 per year from tax changes while the poorest households lose roughly $1,600. For higher education he highlighted four major provisions: the removal of income based repayment options, higher taxes on endowments, accountability rules tying federal aid to graduate earnings and tighter borrowing caps. “These changes will most affect those with the least bargaining power: low-income students and smaller institutions,” Shikaki said. Furthermore, he warned that liberal arts colleges could face declining diversity if affordability gaps drive enrollment back toward wealthier families. “The approach treats college as a place where you go to train to work, that’s it,” he said, adding that over time the humanities and social sciences could be sidelined in favor of pre-professional tracks. 

Shikaki also stressed the pressure the bill is placing on institutions beyond Trinity. He pointed to cases where large universities have bowed to political demands. “Columbia caved completely and Brown recently did as well,” he said, warning that even Ivy League schools with vast resources have struggled to resist federal directives. In his view coordinated advocacy and legal challenges remain critical, though he acknowledged their limits. “Petitions can delay but not always stop policy shifts,” he noted. Without stronger collective action he argued individual colleges particularly smaller liberal arts schools will face difficult compromises. 

At Trinity those pressures ripple through daily life. Martinez emphasized how students from marginalized groups must weigh visibility in activism while others worry about future tuition hikes. “It’s really tricky… for the school to function. It relies on donors. It relies on tuition,” she said, recalling frustrations from recent divestment debates. Hyde, for his part, argued that the best response is to showcase the value of applied liberal arts. He pointed to expanded internships, research opportunities and more intentional recruiting from community colleges. “Hands-on learning, research, internships matter,” he said, describing how Trinity is adapting to shifting expectations of career preparation. 

As the semester progresses, the Big Beautiful Bill is reshaping campus life in ways both visible and subtle. Families are renegotiating affordability, students from marginalized groups weigh their visibility and Trinity’s leadership stresses continuity of mission under tightening rules. While the College’s independence from federal aid offers some insulation, national politics are still felt in Hartford. “This feels big and far away, but it’s happening to real people,” Martinez said. The test for Trinity will be whether it can preserve a broad liberal arts education while meeting stricter federal requirements and sustaining access for the students who need it most.