Harvard University will remain silent on matters outside its ‘core function’

After Harvard University faced strong post-October 7 backlash related to the war between Israel and Hamas, the institution said it would no longer issue statements that fall outside the “core function of the University “.

The decision came from one of two working groups announced in April by Interim President Alan Garber and Interim Provost John Manning to address the following questions: how to create better engagement between different viewpoints and whether the institution should speak out on public issues.

The group on institutional voice wrote that the university should only speak out to protect its “core function,” which it defines as cultivating an environment where members can research, teach and learn.

“Let’s be clear: the university is not a neutral institution. He values ​​open inquiry, expertise, and diversity of viewpoints, as these are the means by which he seeks the truth. The policy of speaking officially only on issues directly related to the core function of the university, and not beyond, serves these values. This should enable the university to endure and thrive, providing its unique public good, even – and especially – during times of intense public controversy,” the task force said.

The group said that if the university were to speak out on matters unrelated to its “core function”, the integrity and credibility of the institution would be compromised and there would “inevitably be intense pressure to do so from from multiple competing parties on almost every front.” every imaginable problem of the day.

Harvard University was the center of media attention and ongoing controversy when former Harvard President Claudine Gay Ph.D. testified at a congressional hearing in December regarding the anti-Semitism on campus. She was joined by the presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

During the hearing, each president wavered on whether calls for genocide violated their code of conduct. Each said these calls would depend on the context.

Gay and University of Pennsylvania President Elizabeth Magill apologized and then resigned.

• Learn more: Brandeis presents itself as a refuge from anti-Semitism. This is how it happens

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and Workforce subsequently subpoenaed Harvard for its failure to produce “priority documents” related to the anti-Semitism investigation.

Harvard also received a failing grade in the Anti-Defamation League’s rankings. report on anti-Semitism on campus.

On May 22, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law filed a lawsuit in federal court against Harvard, claiming the institution ignored and tolerated anti-Semitism on campus .

The complaint was filed after Harvard students on May 14 ended their pro-Palestinian encampment, which they had established several weeks earlier on the Cambridge University campus.

• Learn more: Harvard students end pro-Palestinian encampment on campus

Harvard administrators agreed to remove student protesters’ suspensions as a “precondition” to ending the encampment.

At the same time, the day before graduation, school officials announced that 13 Harvard student protesters would not be able to receive diplomas, saying the students had violated university policies through their conduct during the demonstration in the camp.

The decision came after a recommendation from faculty members to allow students to graduate.

The lawsuit filed by the Brandeis Center is not the first against Harvard. In January, several Jewish students filed a lawsuit against the institution, accusing it of becoming “a bastion of rampant anti-Jewish hatred and harassment.”

The Institutional Voice Task Force wrote that if the university takes an official position on an issue, it can be seen as siding with only one perspective, which can alienate community members.

“At a university that appeals to the entire country and the world, almost any significant national or global event has the potential to personally affect a member of our community. Yet by issuing official statements of empathy, the university runs the risk of giving the impression that it cares more about certain places and events than others,” the group wrote.

That said, faculty members may speak about their areas of expertise but do not represent the university. The institution will also dedicate resources to training staff and assisting affected community members based on the current situation.

“The university is not a government charged with handling all matters of foreign and domestic policy, and its leaders are not, and should not be, selected for their personal political beliefs,” said the group.