Harvard’s failing, and that of its peer institutions, can be summarized in a single word: inconsistency. Ms. Gay assumed leadership of Harvard in a post-George Floyd climate of racial reckoning as its first Black president. A champion of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, she made racial justice on campus a cornerstone of her efforts at Harvard. The institution’s leaders spoke clearly and passionately against Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and police abuse after Floyd’s death, but when Hamas launched its horrific Oct. 7 massacre of Jews and others in Israel, Ms. Gay (and other university presidents) did not immediately and forcefully condemn it. To outraged alumni and other critics, Harvard had no good explanation.

Ms. Gay modified her position and, sincerely, professed her rejection of terrorism and antisemitism, only to find herself embroiled in another political mess when she and Ms. Magill, at a Republican-led congressional hearing, responded with bloodless, lawyerly language to questions about whether an on-campus call for genocide against Jews would violate their rules against bullying and harassment. The hearing, of course, was a political trap laid by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), and — legally speaking — the answer Ms. Gay gave was a correct exposition of free-speech doctrine. A call for genocide against Jews, though definitely odious, might be permissible political speech, depending on when and how it was uttered. The problem, again, was inconsistency: Recent history confirms that universities know how to define and police offensive speech when they wish to, often when it offends against prevailing progressive sentiment. Why seem to balk at an example of antisemitic speech?

[I’m grading on a curve here but considering this came from the Washington Post it’s not too bad. They at least seem to get the basic problem with the hypocrisy many universities display when it comes to free speech. They go on to say that, when it comes to plagiarism, “consistency required that Ms. Gay be held to the same standard as students over whom she presides.” In other words, removing her was the right call. – John]