The line to punch Harvard in the trust fund or cut ties with them in other ways in response to the infamous letter supporting Hamas continues to grow longer. Former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan has curtailed his relationship with the university, withdrawing his offer to participate in fellowship programs there. Hogan isn’t a Harvard Grad himself (he attended Florida State) and there is no mention of him being a significant financial donor, but he’s a fairly big name in the political world, and Harvard no doubt valued having him in their stable. But from the sound of his announcement, that relationship is over unless the university makes some major changes and it doesn’t sound as if that’s going to happen. (Politico)

Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan announced Monday that he is withdrawing his offer to participate in two fellowships at Harvard University after the campus has been embroiled in controversy over its response to the Israel-Hamas war.

Hogan offered to participate in fellowships at the John F. Kennedy School of Government and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health months ago but withdrew those offers Monday because of what he called “Harvard’s failure to immediately and forcefully denounce the anti-Semitic vitriol” after over 30 student groups released a statement that blamed Israel for the surprise Oct. 7 Hamas attack.

“I cannot condone the dangerous anti-Semitism that has taken root on your campus,” Hogan wrote in a letter to Harvard President Claudine Gay, adding, “While these students have a right to free speech, they do not have a right to have hate speech go unchallenged by your institution.”

Considering that Hogan continues to make noises about a potential presidential run next year, possibly as an independent, he probably doesn’t want his name associated with Harvard in any way at this point. They shouldn’t have much of a problem operating those fellowships without him (assuming they can find replacements who support antisemitism and terrorism, anyway), but this is another very public black eye for the school.

Is any of this sinking in at Harvard yet? They’ve already lost the support of some of their top-dollar donors, and more people are abandoning ship. Harvard President Claudine Gay is very much in the spotlight because of all of this. She was initially silent when the Hamas-supporting letter from more than 30 student groups went out. Then, when it obviously began blowing up in her face, she released a statement that failed to satisfy anyone.

You can read the brief, three paragraph statement here if you missed it originally, but she was clearly trying to find a way to walk a tightrope and she was doing it without a net. Everything she wrote that came close to being the right thing to do came with a caveat. She started out by “condemning” the “terrorist atrocities perpetrated by Hamas.” That wasn’t too bad, but note that she wasn’t condemning terrorism in general or even Hamas itself. She was specifically referencing the actions on October 7. And even then she couldn’t resist adding the caveat, “whatever one’s individual views of the origins of longstanding conflicts in the region.” It was an obvious suggestion that blaming Israel for the “origins” of the conflict was on the table.

She next attempted to distance her administration, not condemning what the student groups wrote, but by saying that no student or groups of students “speaks for Harvard University or its leadership.” Fair enough, but you are the head of its leadership and clearly you speak for it, right? There wasn’t a word about where she stood personally on the subject of blaming Israel entirely for the attacks (which is what the student groups did) nor any condemnation of that accusation. Everyone was left entirely in the dark as to where she stood and that was probably by design.

Claudine Gay could have stopped the bleeding on day two or three of this saga if she truly desired to and had the principles to do so. She wouldn’t have even needed to expel all of the participating students (though that wouldn’t have been a bad idea). If she had taken a bold stand against terrorism and antisemitism and denounced those at her university that participated, she probably wouldn’t have lost most of her donors and other supporters like Hogan who have cut their lines and gone elsewhere to fish. But she didn’t do that. Perhaps if enough financial pressure is applied, she might go further in the future. But at that point will it be too late?