Testifying in the House Education and Workforce Committee, Dec. 4, 57-year-old University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magil embarrassed the university and her board of directors, acting like an fool. Responding to a yes or no question from 39-year-old Rep. Elise Stephanik on whether or not calling for genocide against Jews violated Penn’s code of conduct, Magil said it depended on the context. Magil equivocated on the most simple question regarding anti-Semitic hate speech, leaving 50-year-old Penn. Gov. Josh Shapiro dumfounded that a university president could embarrass the institution and state with such ignorance. Jewish students at Penn can only think that the university under Magil treats Jews differently that other protected groups like Blacks and LGBTQIA+ for whom the university has a strict code of conduct about threats or obscene language.
Magil got defensive under Stephanik’s cross examination, giving the most blatently unacceptable answer. Stephanik only wanted her, as university president, to state that no form of death threats or harassment was acceptable to any group of students. Magil said pro-Palestinian protesters saying “from the river to the sea” or threatening genocide violated Penn’s code of conduct. Magil knew that Penn prohibits inappropriate, offensive or threatening language for any group, especially Blacks or LGBTQIA-+ persons, knowing the university wouldn’t tolerate it for a second. Why Magil, who’s left herself in an untenable position to continue as Penn’s president, would say something so unacceptable, so illogical is anyone’s guess. Her board asked her today if she should resign knowing that she cannot represent the university with distinction as president.
When asked by Stephanik about pro-Palestinian protesters calling for genocide against Jews, Magil said it depends on the context. “If the speech turned into conduct it can be harassment,” Magil said, the speech would have be “directed, severe, and pervasive,” but it is “context dependant decision,” Magil told Stephaik. Magil knows that Penn’s code of conduct does not permit White students to call African Americans the “N-word.” She knows, regardless or context, calling LGBTQIA+ derogatory names or making threats would result in immediate disciplinary action. So, why would Magil be so defiant in saying it’s OK for pro-Palestinian porters or anyone else to call for “intifada” or genocide of Jews. Besides which, what to Penn’s Jewish students or faculty have to do with what’s happening in Israel? American Jews don’t speak for Israel and Israel doesn’t speak for them.
Gov. Shapiro was astonished that the Penn president could embarrass the university by sounding so illogical, ill-informed, oblivious to hate speech in general. Magil knows that Penn Doesn’t tolerate offensive language toward any protected group, certainly not calling for death to all Jews. “It’s permissive approach to hate speech calling for violence against Jews and laissez-faire attitude toward harassment and discrimination against Jewish students violates policies,” said a letter from Mr. Stevens and Stone Ridge Management offering Penn a $100 million a year in management fees for university fund raising. Funds from Stone Ridge Management are used by Penn create a finance innovation center. If Magil doesn’t change her tune on permitting threats of genocide against Jewish students, she could lose over $100 million in revenue for University of Pennsylvania.
What was so difficult in the House Education and Workplace hearing for Magil to understand about threat of violence on Jewish students at Penn? What can her Jewish faculty think of Magil’s leadership when she can’t say unequivocally that threat or taunts of genocide against Jews is strictly prohibited at Penn. Stephanik wanted Magil and her Ivy League colleagues 53-yar-old Harvard University President Claudine Gay and 62-year-old MIT President Sally Kornbluth to know that anti-Semitism or threats of violence have no place at any university or other places for that matter. All the three presidents had to say was if anti-Semitic taunts were not prohibited in codes of conduct, they’d make sure that they would be in the near future. Stephanik asked some simple questions that embarrassed all three Ivy League presidents because of their defensive answers.
University presidents and the public must know that racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism are not tolerated in the public or private sector in the United States. Offensive speech or threats of violence don’t depend on context because there’s zero tolerance. All three presidents told the House Education and Workplace Committee under oath that they preserve the rights of Free Speech on their campuses. Yet there are many examples of Free Speech squelched because the views of certain speakers don’t match the liberal politics on campus. But when it comes to calling for “intifada” or genocide against Jews, university presidents must know that they must treat anti-Semitic rhetoric the same way they treat offensive language against Blacks and LGBTQIA+ students and faculty. Magil, Gay and Kornbluth must know there’s no tolerance of anti-Semitism on their campuses.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
