Columbia University has announced the resignation of its interim president, Katrina Armstrong, marking another leadership change during a turbulent period for the institution.
The decision comes just a week after the university introduced sweeping policy changes in response to the United States President Donald Trump administration’s withdrawal of $400 million in federal funding due to campus protests.
Armstrong, who assumed the interim presidency in August 2024, stepped into the role during intense scrutiny over Columbia’s handling of demonstrations, particularly those related to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Her appointment followed the resignation of Minouche Shafik, who faced mounting criticism over how the university managed campus encampments.
In a statement addressing Armstrong’s departure, Board of Trustees Chair David J. Greenwald acknowledged her efforts, stating, “Dr. Armstrong accepted the role of interim president at a time of great uncertainty for the University and worked tirelessly to promote the interests of our community.”
To ensure leadership continuity, the university has appointed Claire Shipman, a longtime board member and journalist, as acting president while a formal search is conducted.
Columbia’s Concessions Following Trump’s Federal Funding Revocation
Columbia recently enacted a series of stringent measures, seemingly aligning with federal demands in hopes of restoring lost funding.
These new policies impose strict limits on demonstrations, enhance disciplinary enforcement, and expand the authority of both the provost and campus police.
Additionally, the university has pledged to conduct an immediate review of its Middle East curriculum.
Armstrong underscored the reasoning behind these policy changes, saying, “We have worked hard to address the legitimate concerns raised both from within and without our Columbia community, including by our regulators, with respect to the discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts our Jewish community has faced in the wake of October 7, 2023.”
Following these adjustments, three federal agencies; the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, and the General Services Administration—expressed tentative approval, calling Columbia’s steps a “positive first step.”
Despite these policy shifts, faculty unions are pushing back. This week, labor unions representing Columbia educators filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, contesting the legitimacy of the funding cuts.
The suit alleges that the administration is leveraging financial resources to impose restrictions on free speech and undermine the university’s academic autonomy.
Over the weekend, Armstrong met with faculty members, urging them to support the new policies.
According to The Wall Street Journal, she warned that six federal agencies were actively investigating Columbia and that the loss of funding could be “potentially devastating to our students in particular.”
However, resistance among faculty remains strong, with concerns over the implications of these restrictions for academic freedom and student expression.
As Columbia grapples with these internal shifts, it remains at the forefront of a larger national debate over free speech, antisemitism, and student activism.
The university was the first to experience federal funding cuts under Trump’s crackdown on colleges accused of tolerating antisemitism.
The past academic year was marked by widespread unrest, with Columbia serving as a focal point for pro-Palestinian protests, counterprotests, and high-profile arrests. The situation even led to scaled-back graduation ceremonies.
Now, as students prepare to return to campus, questions linger over how these newly imposed restrictions will be enforced—and whether they will be enough to satisfy both federal authorities and an increasingly divided university community.
