The weekend coincided with the release of early application admission lists by American universities, and some people were excited and some were sad. In fact, the principals of the top schools have not had a good time recently.
With the Palestinian-Israeli war burning into Harvard and Stanford: students were dissuaded, professors were dismissed, and the school lost its big donor, a ** conflict became more and more intense
The three presidents of the top universities Harvard, MIT, and Penn have been called for removal by more than 70 US lawmakers, citing dissatisfaction with the president's testimony at the campus anti-Semitism hearing.
The latest development in the event is the resignation of the new Penn president in 2022**, and the new presidents of Harvard and MIT who took office this year are still trapped in the vortex.
It has only been a few months since the world's top universities have welcomed female heads of schools.
From left: MIT Chancellor Sally Kornbruce and University of Pennsylvania Chancellor Liz MagillClaudine Gay, president of Harvard University. In addition to studying, it is more important to understand a very different society, in which law is one of the most important cognitive contexts.
Harris, author of The Silence of the Lambs, aptly describes it: the law is the backbone of the nation. The Penn motto, which was involved in the turmoil this time, is also related to the law: laws without morals are useless(Immoral laws are useless.) ）
Every debate and outcome,All cast a weight on the balance that maintains balance.
The surging public opinion triggered by this hearing, did the elite universities really do something wrong?Where is the border?The different reactions of each school have confirmed their own school motto.
In November, Patrick Dai, a Chinese-American Cornell student, posted online that he killed Jews and is now being arrested by the F.B.I. and faces five years in prison. 
One is gone, and two are waitingMany students will find that when they go to the United States, they will find that they can sue for anythingWhy are you in a lawsuit every day?Why does everyone have to hire a lawyer?
The U.S. judicial system is very complex, and this six-hour hearing of the president passedResolution. To put it simply, a resolution refers to a resolution that is used by a body or organization to express a viewpoint, position or intention on a particular issue, event, policy or proposal, to debate and vote on a formal setting, and to play the role of calling for and exerting influence. For private universities in the United States, the highest governing body is the board of directors of each university, and it is up to the board of trustees and individuals to decide whether the president will leave or not. The response to the bloody storm set off by the resolution has been different. 
From left: Claudine Gay, president of Harvard University;Liz Magill, University of Pennsylvania;Pamela Nadell, professor of history and Jewish studies at American University;and MIT President Sally Kornbluth (Source: CNN).
Let's start with the timeline of this incident.
On Dec. 5, the three principals were heard before the House Education and Workforce Committee. New York State Congressman Stefanik led a group of lawmakers to demand the resignation of the three principals.
Four days after the hearing, under surging pressure and the threat of a $100 million divestment from Penn financiersThe president of Penn resigned, and the chairman of the Penn Board of Trustees resigned at the same time
Unlike Penn, just one day after the hearing, the MIT board issued a brief statement that was stated in just a few sentencesFull and unreserved support for the principal, showing the determination of this strong school of science and technology as always.
Harvard, on the other hand, is mired in strife, with voices for and against both inside and outside the university at bay.
A week after the hearing, Harvard's Board of Trustees finally broke its silence and decided that President Gay would remain in office.
But at the same time, the school administration should have made a quicker, more direct and clearer condemnation in the first moments of Hamas's surprise attack. Both sides saved face.
Harvard was torn apart by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, immediately after the resignation of the president of Penn, leading congressman Stefanik immediately posted on the X social platform: One Down two to go.(One has **, two are waiting to go), never stop.
The hearing of the three principals began at 10:15 in the morning of the same day and lasted about 6 hours.
In the short **, Stefanik asks and pursues a question around a question:
When someone on campus calls for the genocide of Jews, does it violate the rules of Harvard, Massachusetts, and Penn, should it be punished?
The three principals replied almost unanimously
1) When words are transformed into actions, punishment is meted out
2) If it is merely speech, it depends on the specific situation.
Someone is angry:
For such a big question, for example, when a student says that they want to kill all the Jews, the principals just don't answer yes or no, but go around in circles and say depends on context (depending on the situation), you should resign!」
Others argue that councillors are asking questions of right and wrong, but principals are faced with specific questions every day: for example, if students shout a few slogans, should they be disciplined?Do you want to be fired?
As the principal, does the school have to protect the students?Of course, the protection of some students may harm the rights and interests of othersThe balance is in **?
As the principals answered the questions, they kept looking through the stack of paper in front of them, part of which was the rules of the schoolPrincipals are rummaging through the rules to answer questions
The critical point and balance point of the school rules for the punishment caused by speech are the two key points answered by the principals above.
What did the principal mess up?
Charles Fried, a senior law professor at Harvard, wrote in support of the president's Context MattersIt depends, of course
Professor Fried has been on the faculty of Harvard Law School since 1961 and served as the U.S. Attorney General for four years from 1985, representing the United States in litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court.
He said: "If I am asked if it is against Harvard rules to call for genocide against the Jews, I feel obligated to answer like a president: it really depends on the circumstances." 」
Professor Fried.
Professor Fried cites the decision of the Supreme Court in Brandenburg vs. FriedThe unanimous ruling in Ohio states that the First Amendment protects speech itself (speech itself is, indeed, well-protected).
Unless such speech gives rise to an imminent violation of law and is likely to incite or produce such conduct. 」
Even in the case of hate speech, while some national courts have allowed criminal prosecution of so-called hate speech, our Supreme Court has never deviated from its principle of incitement. 」
Principals cited examples of what constitutes a specific situation, such as targeting a specific person (rather than a generic slogan), or for example, harassing remarks that are very serious (severity or not needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis).
It can be said that the principals' answer is based on the law and in accordance with the school rules, and it is a correct answer.
However, the surging public opinion suggests that the principals have indeed screwed up something.
Some say that principals are too reserved to give the right answer on a technical level:
Failed to take full advantage of the largest megaphone in the country to answer this question well
Many people accuse the Ivy League of becoming a far-left stronghold and going too far in terms of political correctness, so it now needs to be corrected.
There were even people in this hearing,I am also very unhappy about why the principals of the three prestigious schools are all women
To answer this question, it is almost enough to ask the rhetorical question, if all three principals were men, would anyone else ask the same question?
At the same time, the principals' answers that followed the school rules and almost followed the script also attracted a lot of ** criticism, and instead thought that the principals' answers were evasive and vague.
The principals' mistake may have been to ignore the fact that in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Jewish community in the United States is vulnerable, and the principals have only given technical answersBut he did not empathize emotionally, nor did he give a stronger and warmer answer morally.
Harvard President Gay also made a formal apology in an interview with the Harvard school newspaper after the hearing:
I'm sorry, words matter, and I don't know what to say but regret when words amplify the pain of Jewish students. 」
The truth of the school motto becomes clearer the more it is debatedAfter the resignation of the Penn president, the pressure came to MIT and Harvard.
In the midst of the turmoil that forced the president to resign, MIT showed extraordinary unity and shared responsibility.
The deans of departments, faculty and staff, and the alumni association all issued statements in full support for the president, saying:
Massachusetts as a communityResolutely oppose any form of racism and hate speech。But the task of stopping anti-Semitism and fighting racial hatred is greatThe principal must not be left alone. We are a community, and we stand with the principal and share the responsibility. 」
He also called for staying true to Massachusetts' original aspiration: to promote scientific and technological progress and meet the challenges of the country and the world in the 21st century.
This strong school of science and technology can be described as simple and crude in its response to this turmoil:Solidarity + action。It also seems to confirm the school's motto:Use both hands and brains, not only to talk about doctrine, but also to do practical things
By the way, the current president of Massachusetts, Sally Kornbruce, is herself Jewish.
Sally was originally a biologist.
Unlike MIT, Harvard, on the other side, fell silent for more than a week.
As a result, more than 500 faculty and staff members of Harvard signed a letter to the board of directors in support of Gay, followed by a letter from the Harvard Alumni Association and overseas alumni associations to the board of directors to support Gay's retention in office.
The Harvard school newspaper published an editorial "Harvard University and President Gay, Resolutely Do Not Bow Your Head", which pointed directly to the context of StefanikHarvard seems to have become an anti-Semitic hell.
And we're Harvard students, we're eyewitnesses of what's really happened on campus in the last two months, let's get straight to the point:The vast majority of Harvard students are by no means anti-Semitic
Antisemitism is real in this country, not only on campuses, but also on campus posters to social media. It is a big, serious issue that deserves serious discussion, including a review of Harvard's disciplinary rules. But it should never be a political theater for politicians.
The editorial called on Harvard and its president to resolutely not bow their heads for the sake of academic independence and for the cornerstone of freedom of speech.
Finally, the Harvard Board of Directors issued a statementPrincipal Guy stays in office
Interestingly, the statement also responded to Guy's plagiarism, showing that the Board of Trustees attaches equal importance to academic conduct compared to the hearing turmoil.
"At the initiative of Dr. Gay, the Board of Directors conducted an investigation and concluded that:According to Harvard's academic rules, it does not constitute plagiarism
As for the major rights and wrongs in the Israeli-Palestinian war, the bottom line of human civilization, the cornerstone of freedom of speech, the identification and boundaries of hate speech, the revision of Harvard's disciplinary rules, and even the president Gay himself, various voices at Harvard are still fiercely arguing and contending.
Perhaps, this also confirms Harvard's motto:Veritas Truth - The more you argue, the clearer it becomes
Subsequently, the school also punished students who participated in anti-Semitic activities.
On December 11, four students at Harvard who were involved in antisemitic activities faced disciplinary investigations. They are not because of the rhetoricRather, it was because during the November march, he led his classmates out of the classroom and occupied the school auditorium for 24 hours.
According to Harvard disciplinary rules, obstruction of the normal activities of a member of the University constitutes unacceptable conduct and is subject to appropriate disciplinary action. 」
Three days later, the MIT Office of Anti-Discrimination and Harassment issued updated disciplinary guidelines on how to handle cases of school tensions caused by the war with Israel and Palestine.
The school announced that as of the 14th, there were 9 cases in different stages of the complaint resolution process, and stated that the disciplinary cases were handled, and in order to protect students' privacy, the school would not disclose the details of the cases.
It is foreseeable that there will be more and more such social issues in the future. Like a questionnaire we did in an article, most parents believe that before going abroad, in addition to subject ability,The ability to extract information in the face of a complex world, the ability to think critically about human opinions and factsand self-protection, which is even more crucial.