UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk vows to restore campus trust amid ‘nervousness and anxiety’

Since he took the helm this year at UCLA, Chancellor Julio Frenk has found himself in a vortex of unprecedented obstacles not only to his campus, but also to the nation’s institutions of higher education.

“Higher education in the United States faces its moment of greatest challenge in living memory,” Frenk said Thursday to more than 1,300 guests gathered at Royce Hall as he was inaugurated UCLA’s seventh chancellor during a ceremony replete with professors in academic robes and regalia. “We must meet the moment with courage, resilience and wisdom.”

Days after he started Jan. 1, the worst fires in Los Angeles history erupted. A mandatory Palisades fire evacuation zone expanded to the edge of the sprawling Westwood campus. Frenk’s first major decision: He pushed for classes to go online for two weeks, allowing students to flee to safer ground.

He then approved the university’s donation of its under-construction UCLA Research Park, on the site of the former Westside Pavillion, to serve as a Federal Emergency Management Agency disaster recovery center, where more than 1,000 students, faculty and staff volunteered.

Within 10 days, President-elect Donald Trump would be inaugurated.

Trump’s administration soon began slashing medical research funding to universities — the first act of the president’s political battle to remake higher education and rid elite universities of what he sees as their liberal bias, hostility to conservatives and abetting of antisemitism. The research cuts are one of a fusillade of federal actions and threats — coupled with state budget cuts — that led to a UC-wide hiring freeze and austerity measures that have put into question the very core of the University of California’s mission as among the nation’s premier and most diverse research institutions.

Today, UCLA is one of 10 universities placed under the microscope by a federal task force that has canceled billions in research funding and tried to block foreign student enrollment at Harvard in the name of fighting antisemitism. The campus is the focus of two federal investigations over allegations that UCLA illegally considers race in admissions. The UC system as a whole is also facing a Trump investigation over allegations of antisemitic employment discrimination.

The university has also supported suits against the Trump administration’s funding cuts.

Tensions are still fresh since UCLA was propelled into the global spotlight when a pro-Palestinian encampment came under violent attack a year ago. The melee and the encampment are the subject of multiple lawsuits against UCLA and police as smaller protests demanding divestment from financial ties to the war in Gaza have continued.

And under Frenk’s leadership, the university banned Students for Justice in Palestine after pro-Palestinian demonstrators vandalized a UC regent’s Brentwood home. On Thursday, that group and dozens of UCLA organizations and community members, including faculty and labor groups, released an open letter demanding Frenk “put people over profit.” A few dozen pro-Palestinian protesters then rallied outside Royce Hall and nearby Kaplan Hall, where UCLA police said they detained three individuals — two for “illegal use of amplified sound” and one for attempting to take a person from police custody.

During his speech, Frenk said he envisions a UCLA that is committed to broadening “access and success for students from all walks of life.” He spoke Thursday of “restoring public trust in universities” and a “determination to end all forms of prejudice and intolerance.”

“Good universities not only tolerate but cultivate diversity of thought,” Frenk said. “They stand against dogma, conformity and indoctrination. We can disagree, passionately, even vehemently, but always respectfully.”

UCLA’s first Latino chancellor, Frenk was president at the University of Miami for nine years and the dean of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health for six. A scholar of public health who was born in Mexico City, he served as Mexico’s federal secretary of health from 2000 to 2006.

In extensive interview with The Times last week, Frenk said he is positioning UCLA to be “at the service” of the “local community, the national community and the global community,” pointing to its fire disaster response and ongoing university research into issues including racial disparities related to the fire, damage to small community water systems, and disaster recovery planning.

Within campus, he wants to “restore the bonds of trust among members of the UCLA community.” During the interview, he laid out his vision for UCLA and addressed the Trump administration’s attacks on American higher education.

“There’s a strong sense of belonging to the institution and a great pride in UCLA…. At the same time, there’s a lot of nervousness and anxiety because there is uncertainty,” said Frenk, who has held dozens of “listening sessions” with thousands of UCLA community members.

His responses have been edited for length and clarity.

The encampment went up April 25, 2024. Just days earlier, you accepted the offer to become chancellor. What were your impressions of the encampment? What was your conversation with UC President Michael V. Drake?

After the demonstrations began, President Drake asked if I was going to change my mind about taking the role. My answer was unequivocal: No, of course not. Great universities like UCLA bridge divides. They are connective institutions that foster debate and dialogue while always prioritizing respect. This is an opportunity to lead an extraordinary university at an extraordinary time — to build a truly connective, impactful and exemplary university. Together, we will do just that.

About 10% of UCLA’s $11-billion budget comes from federal funding. How do you respond to the Trump administration research cuts?

We need to explain how the research enterprise based in universities like UCLA operates, because it has been the most successful arrangement for producing life-saving research in human history. Common citizens benefit from that technology — but they’re not aware of everything that is behind that. When the government threatens to reduce research funding, of course, it affects universities and the researchers that work there. But the main losers are the citizens who are going to stop benefiting from the clinical trials to develop new drugs, from all the technology — and it’s the economy of the United States. The largest and most dynamic economy is innovation. All that innovation starts with research. Most of that research is carried out in universities. So cutting research is truly a self-inflicted wound. It doesn’t mean we cannot do things better. Of course we can, but just cutting in a major way is going to backfire badly on the well-being, the prosperity and the security of the country.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Harvard has gone to court against the Trump administration to fight funding cuts and a ban on foreign student enrollment, publicly decrying federal actions. Columbia University has negotiated and largely complied with Trump demands, including an overhaul of discipline, hiring new safety officers and conducting a review of admissions and Middle Eastern studies programs.

Will UCLA respond like Harvard or Columbia if sanctioned by the Trump administration?

You know, it depends on what are the specific requests. We are a public institution. We engage with government, local government, the city of L.A. and the county, state government and federal government. Now, we do that within the frame of the rule of law. So anything that violates the rule of law, we won’t do and, if we are required to do that, we will do what we have already been doing, which is also participating in lawsuits…. I signed a statement from the American Assn. of Colleges and Universities where we actually say that we want to engage, we’re open to observations and criticism … and we’re very focused on improving.

“The largest and most dynamic economy is innovation. All that innovation starts with research,” UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk says.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

The government has accused UCLA of enabling antisemitism. What is the status of the federal task force investigation?

First of all, let me say one thing: There has been an increase in antisemitism in universities. This is well-documented, and I am acknowledging that and facing that directly. I have been very active since I started in January — it’s been a top priority of mine — to fix that problem. Fix it means eradicate antisemitism from, in this case, the UCLA campus, which is the one I’m responsible [for]. I hope it happens not just in universities but in society in general.

This is very personal for me. My family was a victim of antisemitism. They had to leave Germany in the 1930s. I’m married to the daughter of a Holocaust survivor. But in addition to being personal, I think it’s the right thing to do. So, while we acknowledge the problem — definitely acknowledge — we are also actively taking action, making decisions to deal with it.

We had a task force internal to UCLA with very clear recommendations. We’ve now instituted an initiative from that group along four lines. One is to improve education on antisemitism and innovating the way we educate. Secondly, is to facilitate the reporting of incidents. We’re hiring a Title VI officer so that the reporting can be easier. Third is enforcing the rules and policies, including disciplinary rules. And fourth is connecting with the community so that we can act together, not in isolation from our community. And in response to the federal government, that’s what I have always stated, yes, there is a problem, and we are working very hard and very diligently and very focused to fix it.

Are you talking to the federal investigators? The top one, Leo Terrell, says that because of “resistance” to his group, the government will sue the UC system.

We will always cooperate with the federal government. I cannot comment on ongoing investigations, as you know, but we are not resisting cooperation. As I said before, we engage with government.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

How do you respond to the Trump administration’s attacks on DEI, including accusations that UCLA is illegally using race in admissions?

Diversity does not mean discrimination. We do not discriminate. In fact, being in California, we are subject to the provisions of Proposition 209 and the University of California complies with those elements. [Proposition 209 is the voter-approved state law barring all public educational institutions in the state from considering race in admissions.]

Now, a lot of the discussion has implicit the assumption that diversity can only be advanced at the expense of excellence. That is not the case at UCLA and, frankly, at any of the top universities that I’m very familiar with, including the other UC universities.

We believe in what we call inclusive excellence. Excellence is at the beginning. We don’t gain anything by admitting students who are going to fail.

For us, diversity is an integral part of excellence and it does not require any of the accusations that the acronym has led to. So, my invitation to society is, let’s leave the acronym aside. Let’s talk about the values. What is the opposite of diversity: uniformity. Do we want only everyone to be identical? I don’t think that’s what anyone wants. What’s the opposite of inclusion? Is it exclusion? Who would we exclude? Let’s have that conversation as a society. What’s the opposite of equity? Equity means everyone deserves a fair chance in life.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

What about the increasing restrictions on international students?

Knowledge is a global good that benefits everyone. Research is intrinsically global. Part of what’s made the American universities the top universities in the world is exactly the fact that they attract talent from everywhere. That, by the way, again, has served the United States very well. Any restriction on that kind of movement, any targeting on the basis of national origin, is obviously not ethical but it’s also to the detriment, not of only the universities, but to the detriment of all the other students. Having students from many parts of the world enriches the experience of everyone. Not only that, some of those students pay full tuition and help us with the financial aid to American citizens and residents.

If there’s concerns about security, let’s deal with that case by case. Blanket measures are never good.