This post was updated May 11 at 7:47 p.m.

Many years ago, I took the entrance exam to pursue graduate studies in my birth country, Iran. Twice I attempted, and twice I was denied. I never learned the true reason for my first rejection. As for the second one, I received a letter from the ministry of higher education informing me that I had failed to prove that I was sufficiently aligned with the “official” values of the country.

I left that country, came to the United States, completed a master’s degree on the East Coast and decided to move to Los Angeles after being accepted to doctoral programs at both UCLA and the University of Southern California.

While attending university in this country, I learned that the purpose of higher education goes beyond pure academic advancements and that the goals of higher education also include the promotion of critical thinking, the fostering of social awareness, and opportunities to participate in community affairs through clubs and other activities – elements that were absent in my undergraduate experience.

The idea was clear: Students ought to become more engaged and informed individuals throughout their higher education.

I also learned about the fundamental rights granted to individuals in this country, that the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech without any fear of censorship or retribution from the government and that every individual is entitled to due process, ensuring that nobody can be prosecuted solely based on viewpoints of those in power.

Now, all of that seems to be changing. In the past few months, students have been barred from participating in social activities by government officials. International students’ visas have been revoked solely based on their opinions, such as in the case of a Tufts University student who wrote an op-ed last year.

Individuals are being detained not for their actions but for their perceived beliefs, such as in the case of a Columbia University graduate’s continued detention, as documented in a government memo.

For me, it feels as though the “official” narrative has come back to haunt us all.

At the same time, institutions of higher education are under pressure from the government to align with an agenda that aims to limit academic freedom and suppress diversity of viewpoints. I would categorize these institutions into two groups according to their responses to the government demands.

The first group includes universities that have complied with the government’s demands with little or no resistance, following Columbia’s approach. The second group, led by Harvard University, consists of universities that have stood up for the values that inspire higher education in this country and have not agreed to the government’s demands.

Following Harvard’s lead, several hundred university presidents and chancellors signed a letter condemning the government’s efforts to interfere with higher education.

They expressed their position by writing, “We speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.”

Meanwhile, here at UCLA, visas for at least 19 international students and alumni were revoked, although they have since been restored. In a recent incident, an international graduate student was detained at the border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Nonetheless, no resolute support for students who have been affected by these policies or are in danger of being targeted is being offered by the university’s administration, nor has there been any clear condemnation of the policies that led to those incidents.

During a recent UCLA Connects town hall on immigration, no concrete measures to protect students and to prevent future detentions or revocations were presented.

Sadly and regretfully, UCLA leaders’ names were notably missing from the original list of university leaders who signed the letter condemning the government’s interference in higher education published April 22. However, since then, the number of signatories has grown from around 200 to over 600, now including both the UCLA chancellor and the UC president, which I view as a positive and necessary step in the right direction.

In response to some universities’ submission to government demands, members of their communities have spoken out, urging these universities to stand up to the federal government and defend academic freedom. This sentiment was clearly demonstrated in a “speak out” event by the students, faculty, staff and alumni at Columbia – where it all started.

In my view, UCLA needs to renounce its alignment with universities that are agreeing to the government’s demands to limit the constitutional rights of students – and instead should align itself with the growing coalition of universities that are standing up to such authoritarianism.

The principles that have guided higher education in this country for centuries are far too important and far too valuable to be compromised under political pressure.

As the great Nelson Mandela once said, “Education is the most powerful weapon we can use to change the world.”

Let us direct that power to change our world for the better by upholding the noble ideas that define higher education.

Mohsen Kargahi, Ph.D., is a UCLA parent, a practicing engineer in the Los Angeles area and a former lecturer at the University of Southern California.