For over six decades, the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, has hosted its prestigious Foreign Affairs Conference, a signature event that draws students and speakers from around the globe for meaningful dialogue on international issues. For many, it was a highlight of the academic calendar—a week devoted to intellectual engagement with diplomats, policymakers, and thought leaders.

From Book Bans to Canceled Lectures, the Naval Academy Is Bending to Trump

This year, however, that long-standing tradition came to an abrupt halt. The 2025 conference, set to take place from April 7 to 11, was canceled just weeks before its opening. The decision stunned students and faculty alike. The conference’s theme—“The Constellation of Humanitarian Assistance: Persevering Through Conflict”—was seen as especially timely, but also politically risky, considering the Trump administration’s recent dismantling of large portions of the nation’s foreign aid initiatives.

Though such a conference typically takes a full year to plan, it was canceled swiftly, raising concerns about the school’s growing efforts to preemptively align itself with the shifting political winds emanating from the White House.

The move was not isolated. It fits into a broader pattern of cautious institutional behavior at the Naval Academy—actions seemingly designed to avoid drawing the ire of former President Trump and his allies. Other decisions, including the mass removal of books from the Nimitz Library and the last-minute cancellation of multiple academic events, underscore how the Academy, unlike traditional civilian universities, operates within a military hierarchy that ultimately answers to the commander-in-chief.

In a public statement, the Academy indicated that all scheduled events were under review to ensure compliance with executive directives and Pentagon policies. While representatives from the Navy and the Academy declined to comment further, internal sources suggest growing concern among faculty that academic freedom is under siege.

Even before the outcome of the 2024 presidential election was known, Academy officials had started preparing for a potential return to power by Trump. One early casualty of this preparation was a planned lecture by NYU historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat. Known for her scholarship on authoritarian regimes, she had been invited to speak in October 2024 as part of the George Bancroft Memorial Lecture series—a long-running program that has featured renowned historians since 1980.

Her talk, “Militaries and Authoritarian Regimes: Coups, Corruption and the Costs of Losing Democracy,” was to focus on the roles of the military in non-U.S. contexts like Italy and Chile. Despite clarifying that she had no intention of referencing Trump in her remarks, opposition quickly formed after right-wing media highlighted her upcoming appearance.

Representative Keith Self of Texas publicly called on Vice Admiral Yvette M. Davids, the Academy’s superintendent, to withdraw the invitation. Within 24 hours, Ben-Ghiat was informed by the Academy’s dean of academics, Dr. Samara L. Firebaugh, that her lecture had been postponed. She later surmised the event would never be rescheduled.

Even after the talk was canceled, conservative organizations like The Heritage Foundation and The Federalist criticized the Academy for having invited her in the first place. A group of House Republicans followed with a letter questioning the speaker selection process. Ben-Ghiat was told the decision was made to avoid violating the Hatch Act—a federal law restricting political activity by government employees—even though her talk was not intended to address contemporary U.S. politics.

“This was a test of institutional loyalty,” Ben-Ghiat reflected. “The Academy passed—but at the cost of its integrity.”

Other cancellations soon followed. One involved Susan Solomon, a National Medal of Science recipient and MIT professor, who was scheduled to deliver the Michelson Lecture on April 14. Sponsored by the Class of 1969, this lecture series has spotlighted leading scientific voices for over four decades. Like Ben-Ghiat, Solomon’s invitation was rescinded due to “misalignment” with executive directives. With too little time to secure a replacement speaker of similar stature, the event was simply scrapped.

The tide of cancellations came alongside a controversial mandate from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who, in January 2025, instructed military academies to comply with a Trump executive order aimed at eliminating “radical indoctrination” in education. Although the order specifically applied to K-12 schools, the Academy’s objections—that it was a college and therefore not subject to the order—were overruled. Compliance was non-negotiable.

By early April, the effects were visible. A total of 381 books were removed from the Nimitz Library, including titles addressing race, gender, and historical injustices. Notably, works by Maya Angelou were among those removed, while controversial texts like Hitler’s Mein Kampf remained on shelves.

Sarah Nimitz Smith, granddaughter of the library’s namesake, Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, criticized the move. “He believed in standing up for what’s right,” she said. “He wouldn’t have folded to political pressure.”

In response, The New Press—publisher of three banned books—offered to provide free copies to faculty to distribute to students. “We thought this sort of censorship was relegated to history,” said Diane Wachtell, the organization’s executive director.

Faculty backlash followed. At least two professors resigned in protest, while 18 others opted for early retirement, citing a hostile environment for intellectual exploration.

Even cultural programming came under scrutiny. Ken Burns, the acclaimed documentarian, had planned to show segments of his new series on the American Revolution during a private screening at the Academy in April. But internal concerns over his past criticism of Trump led to a postponement. Though the event was not canceled outright, officials indicated it would be rescheduled for the following academic year.

In another example, author Ryan Holiday was invited to discuss Stoic philosophy and the value of reading challenging material. But after the Academy reviewed his presentation—specifically his inclusion of news articles referencing the book ban—his April 14 ethics lecture was canceled as well.

This drew criticism from those familiar with the Academy’s traditions, including the family of Vice Admiral James B. Stockdale, for whom the Academy’s ethics center is named. His son recalled how Stockdale’s own deep reading of Marx and Lenin while a prisoner of war helped him resist psychological torture and engage in intellectual debate with his captors.

“He used his mind as a weapon,” his son said. “He believed in facing even the hardest truths head-on.”

William McBride, a respected history professor who served at the Academy for 30 years, chose to forgo a formal retirement honor at the April 25 Dedication Parade. In a letter addressed to Admiral Davids, he criticized the institution’s recent actions, describing the book ban as a betrayal of the Academy’s mission.

“This is not what we were taught to stand for,” he wrote. “Your legacy, no matter your achievements, will now be marked by this shameful compliance.”

He ended with a powerful reminder of a principle instilled in every new cadet when he first joined the Academy: “Where principle is involved, be deaf to expediency.”