3 controversial discussions during the council’s anti-Semitism hearing
On Tuesday, the presidents of three leading US universities – Claudine Gay of Harvard, Sally Kornbluth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Elizabeth Magill of the University of Pennsylvania – were at the center of a controversial congressional hearing on anti-Semitism on college campuses.
In one of the most notable exchanges, school leaders were pressed about whether to discipline students who called for the genocide of the Jews. Their answers – “It’s a context-dependent decision,” Ms Magill replied at one point – were widely criticized.
But administrators faced a barrage of other pointed questions during the House Education and Workforce Committee hearing, mostly from Republicans, who took a persecutory tone as they pushed for more definitive answers.
Here are some of those exchanges:
About chants for the intifada on Harvard’s campus
In one instance, Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, asked Ms. Gay whether the university condoned the chanting of the “intifada” on her campus.
Stefanik: Dr. Gay, a Harvard student who calls for the mass murder of African Americans, is not protected from free speech at Harvard, right?
Homo: Our commitment to freedom of expression…
Stefanik: It’s a yes or no question. Is that correct? Is it okay for students to call for the mass murder of African Americans at Harvard? Is that protected freedom of expression?
Homo: Our commitment to freedom of expression…
Stefanik: It’s a yes or no question. Let me ask you this: You’re president of Harvard, so I assume you’re familiar with the term “intifada,” correct?
Homo: I’ve heard that term, yes.
Stefanik: And you understand that the use of the term “intifada” in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict is indeed a call for violent armed resistance against the State of Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide of Jews. Are you aware of that?
Homo: I personally find that kind of hate speech abhorrent.
Stefanik: And there have been several marches at Harvard where students chanted, “There is only one solution: intifada, revolution” and “Globalize the intifada,” is that right?
Homo: I have heard that thoughtless, reckless, and hateful language on our campus, yes.
Stefanik: So based on your testimony, you understand that this call for intifada involves committing genocide against the Jewish people in Israel and worldwide, correct?
Homo: I say again: I personally find this kind of hate speech abhorrent.
Stefanik: Do you believe this type of hate speech violates Harvard’s code of conduct or is it allowed at Harvard?
Homo: It is contrary to Harvard’s values.
Stefanik: Can’t you just say that this violates the Harvard Code of Conduct?
Homo: We embrace a commitment to free expression, even when it comes to views that are offensive, offensive or hateful – it is when that expression turns into behavior that violates our policies against bullying, harassment, intimidation…
Stefanik: Doesn’t that speech cross that barrier? Doesn’t this speech call for the genocide of the Jews and the elimination of Israel? You testified that you understand that this is the definition of “intifada.” Is that speech in accordance with the Code of Conduct or not?
Homo: We embrace a commitment to free speech and give ample space to free speech, even when it comes to views that are objectionable, outrageous and offensive.
Stefanik: You and I both know that’s not the case.
At a Palestinian writers festival at Penn
Since the Hamas attack in Israel, emotions have been particularly high at the University of Pennsylvania, where the campus was already in commotion over a recent Palestinian literary conference. The conference featured speakers such as Roger Waters of the band Pink Floyd, who was invited in person but appeared via video. Mr. Waters has been criticized by the State Department due to a history of using anti-Semitic tropes. Mr Waters has supported Palestinian causes but denies being anti-Semitic.
On Tuesday, Representative Jim Banks, Republican of Indiana, asked Ms. Magill whether the university had been consistent in its free speech policy. He began asking her why university leadership did not stop the festival organizers from inviting Mr. Waters.
Banks: Why would you host someone like that on your college campus to speak at the so-called Palestinian Rights Literature Festival?
Magill: I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this. There is no place for anti-Semitism at Penn.
Banks: Why did you invite Roger Waters? What did you think you would get out of that?
Magill: Anti-Semitism has no place at Penn, and our free speech policies are guided by the U.S. Constitution.
Banks: Why did you invite Roger Waters?
Magill: Anti-Semitism has no place at Penn.
Banks: Do you condemn what Roger Waters stands for?
Magill: Congressman, prior to the event, I released a statement denouncing the anti-Semitism of some of the speakers at that conference.
Banks: Specifically Roger Waters, yes or no?
Magill: Roger Waters was one of them.
Banks: So you specifically mentioned a man who floated pig balloons with a Star of David during his concerts? I have not seen the conviction, I will look for it after this hearing and I hope I can find that well recorded conviction of yours.
Magill: I raised the anti-Semitism of some speakers at a conference with more than a hundred people.
Banks: In the aftermath of the Palestinian Rights Festival, you and your board chairman wrote a memo outlining Penn’s policy on free speech and you said, quote: “Penn does not regulate the content of speech or symbolic conduct,” you wrote, including speech, quote “ incompatible with the values of the school.” And you went on to say that Penn has no policy against hate speech because, quote, “defining and controlling robust debate, even on the most troubling issues, is unwise.” That’s what you wrote.
But in 2013, Penn canceled Prime Minister Modi’s planned keynote address at an economic forum organized by Wharton, despite opposition from Indian-American professors. And this past year, the administration tried to punish Amy Wax, a law professor, for her stance on DEI and identity issues, and then canceled an event with former ICE director Tom Homan over disruptive student protests simply because he worked for former ICE director . President Donald Trump.
Ms. Magill, the fact is that Penn regulates speech, but he doesn’t like it. Everyone understands this, no one more than the teachers and students who know exactly where the boundaries are that they are allowed to cross. Why did Penn let Prof. Ahmad Almallah to go free, leading hundreds of students to chant: “There is only one solution: the intifada revolution”? Why does that professor still have a job at your university?
Magill: Representatively, our approach to speech is as I have indicated: it follows and is guided by the U.S. Constitution, which allows for robust perspectives. I disagree with the characterization that we treat speech differently, and I cannot discuss an individual disciplinary process.
About flying the Ukrainian flag, but not Israel’s
Representative Stefanik also tried Dr. Harvard’s Gay of what she suggested was an inconsistency when it comes to showing support for foreign nations.
Stefanik: Dr. Gay, has anyone contacted you about raising the Israeli flag over Harvard Yard?
Homo: Yes.
Stefanik: And it was decided not to fly the flag over Harvard Yard?
Homo: It has been standard protocol at the university for years to fly only the American flag unless a dignitary is visiting.
Stefanik: So the decision was made to allow the Ukrainian flag to fly over Harvard Yard?
Homo: That was a decision by my predecessor as an exception to a long-standing rule.
Stefanik: So it was an exception. So you made an exception for the Ukrainian flag, but not for the – the university made an exception for the Ukrainian flag, but not for the Israeli flag.
Homo: That was a choice made by my predecessor.