Ten days after being detained at Boston Logan International Airport and deported back to the Middle East, a 17-year-old Palestinian student from Tyre, Lebanon, was readmitted into the U.S. and allowed to begin his undergraduate education at Harvard University this week.
As reported by <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/8/27/incoming-freshman-deported/#.XWTG5epzJI0.twitter">The Harvard Crimson</a>, Ismail Ajjawi, a member of Harvard&#8217;s 2023 class, was determined to be &#8220;inadmissible&#8221; by immigration authorities a few days before the start of the semester after he was detained for several hours at Logan International, had his cell phone and computer temporarily confiscated for review, and was questioned about his friends&#8217; social media activity and his political and religious beliefs, according to the student.
Upon arriving to the airport, Ajjawi and several other international students were questioned by immigration officials, the Crimson reported. &#8220;While the other students were allowed to leave, Ajjawi alleges an immigration officer continued to question him about his religion and religious practices in Lebanon,&#8221; according to the campus paper. &#8220;The same officer then asked him to unlock his phone and laptop, and left to search them for roughly five hours, Ajjawi alleges.&#8221;
&#8220;When I asked every time to have my phone back so I could tell them about the situation, the officer refused and told me to sit back in [my] position and not move at all,&#8221; Ajjawi told the Crimson. &#8220;After the 5 hours ended, she called me into a room, and she started screaming at me. She said that she found people posting political points of view that oppose the US on my friend[s] list. I responded that I have no business with such posts and that I didn&#8217;t like, [s]hare or comment on them and told her that I shouldn&#8217;t be held responsible for what others post. I have no single post on my timeline discussing politics.&#8221;
What exactly the posts in question said is unclear.
While the State Department would not offer comment on the case, citing the confidentiality of visa records, a Customs and Border Patrol spokesperson told the paper that Ajjawi was deported because he was found to be &#8220;inadmissible.&#8221;
&#8220;Applicants must demonstrate they are admissible into the U.S. by overcoming ALL grounds of inadmissibility including health-related grounds, criminality, security reasons, public charge, labor certification, illegal entrants and immigration violations, documentation requirements, and miscellaneous grounds,&#8221; the spokesperson said in a statement to the Crimson. &#8220;This individual was deemed inadmissible to the United States based on information discovered during the CBP inspection.”
The deportation of Ajjawi was met with pushback from the university and the Harvard community, as well as the student and faculty rights group, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). &#8220;Ajjawi&#8217;s allegations, if accurate, represent a threat to academic freedom, one that should be taken seriously by those who care about protecting expressive freedoms in the United States,&#8221; FIRE&#8217;s Director of Targeted Advocacy Sarah McLaughlin said in a statement to The Daily Wire.
Ajjawi&#8217;s family expressed relief that the situation has been resolved and thanked the group that helped him get into Harvard, <a href="https://www.amideast.org/about-amideast">AMIDEAST</a>. &#8220;The last ten days have been difficult and anxiety filled, but we are most grateful for the thousands of messages of support and particularly the work of AMIDEAST,&#8221; the family&#8217;s statement reads, as reported by the <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/9/3/harvard-student-turned-away-arrives/">Crimson</a>. &#8220;We hope now that everyone can respect our and Ismail’s privacy and he can now simply focus on settling into College and his important class work.&#8221;
FIRE also expressed relief that Ajjawi had been admitted. &#8220;Given the serious chilling effect viewpoint-based decision-making creates, we hope that other cases like Ajjawi&#8217;s will receive similar attention and scrutiny,&#8221; the organization said.

Lawrence S. Bacow Sworn In As New Harvard President

UPDATE: Palestinian Student Deported After Being Questioned About Friends’ Social Media Posts Arrives At Harvard

Harvard

Immigration

Lebanon

Palestinians

A 17-year-old Palestinian student from Tyre, Lebanon, who was supposed to start classes this week at Harvard University, was abruptly deported Friday night after officials detained him at Boston&#8217;s international airport. After questioning the student and examining his cell phone and computer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) says they determined that he was &#8220;inadmissible&#8221; to the country. The student, who is getting legal help from the university and a non-profit to try to get readmitted to the U.S., says he was specifically questioned about social media posts by some of his friends.
According to <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/8/27/incoming-freshman-deported/#.XWTG5epzJI0.twitter">The Harvard Crimson</a>, the student, Ismail Ajjawi, who was supposed to be a member of Harvard&#8217;s 2023 class, says that shortly after arriving at Boston Logan International Airport on Friday, officials detained him and asked for access to his cell phone and his computer, both of which they took for review for several hours. Ajjawi sent a written statement to The Harvard Crimson about what he said took place on Friday.
&#8220;Upon arrival, Ajjawi faced questioning from immigration officials along with several other international students,&#8221; the campus paper reports. &#8220;While the other students were allowed to leave, Ajjawi alleges an immigration officer continued to question him about his religion and religious practices in Lebanon. The same officer then asked him to unlock his phone and laptop, and left to search them for roughly five hours, Ajjawi alleges.&#8221;
The student says that after reviewing his devices, the officer returned to &#8220;scream&#8221; at him about the social media posts of his friends.
&#8220;When I asked every time to have my phone back so I could tell them about the situation, the officer refused and told me to sit back in [my] position and not move at all,&#8221; the student claims. &#8220;After the 5 hours ended, she called me into a room, and she started screaming at me. She said that she found people posting political points of view that oppose the US on my friend[s] list.&#8221;
&#8220;I responded that I have no business with such posts and that I didn&#8217;t like, [s]hare or comment on them and told her that I shouldn&#8217;t be held responsible for what others post,&#8221; Ajjawi told the paper. &#8220;I have no single post on my timeline discussing politics.&#8221;
The student says that after being questioned about his friends&#8217; social media activity, the officer gave him back his devices but canceled his visa and told him that he would be deported.
Asked for comment on Ajjawi&#8217;s deportation, a State Department official told The Harvard Crimson that visa records are confidential. A CBP spokesperson, however, informed the paper that Ajjawi was deported because he was found to be &#8220;inadmissible.&#8221; The spokesperson offered a general explanation of the way the agency determines admissibility.
&#8220;Applicants must demonstrate they are admissible into the U.S. by overcoming ALL grounds of inadmissibility including health-related grounds, criminality, security reasons, public charge, labor certification, illegal entrants and immigration violations, documentation requirements, and miscellaneous grounds,&#8221; the spokesperson wrote in a statement reported by the Crimson. &#8220;This individual was deemed inadmissible to the United States based on information discovered during the CBP inspection.”
The paper notes that both the university&#8217;s immigration lawyers and the nonprofit that provided Ajjawi a scholarship, AMIDEAST, are working with the federal government to try to get the student admitted into the country.
<a href="https://www.amideast.org/about-amideast">AMIDEAST</a> is a nonprofit founded in 1951 focused on international education and training for residents of the Middle East and North Africa. The group describes its mission as seeking &#8220;to create hope, opportunity, and mutual understanding among people in the Middle East, North Africa, and the United States through life-changing opportunities for education and cultural exchanges.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51331/update-palestinian-student-deported-after-being-james-barrett">UPDATE: Palestinian Student Deported After Being Questioned About Friends’ Social Media Posts Arrives At Harvard</a>
H/T <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/department-of-homeland-security/458956-harvard-freshman-deported-after">The Hill</a>

Logan International

Report: Palestinian Harvard Student Deported After Officials Detain Him At Airport

Middle East

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) responded to his former Harvard Law School constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe on Sunday after Tribe claimed that white supremacists opposed abortion over the fear it would reduce the white population.
“My old con law prof, sadly, being deeply deceptive,” Cruz replied. “Abortion targets in particular minority women.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">1/2 My old con law prof, sadly, being deeply deceptive. Abortion targets in particular minority women. More than 1/2 of African-American babies, tragically, are aborted. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a vehement advocate of eugenics. <a href="https://t.co/Lx0T7XBLUy">https://t.co/Lx0T7XBLUy</a> <a href="https://t.co/PjFR9loFnV">https://t.co/PjFR9loFnV</a>
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1160685658924560384?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Cruz’s remarks were in response to Tribe’s contention that white supremacists advocate for the protection of life because “they fear it’ll reduce the number of white infants and thus contribute to what they fear as non-white ‘replacement.’”
“Never underestimate the way these issues and agendas are linked,” Tribe further warned on Twitter. “This turns ‘intersectionality’ on its head.”
Cruz, however, rebuffed Tribe’s claim and further educated the noted left-wing professor on the history of the so-called abortion rights movement in America.
“Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a vehement advocate of eugenics,” he explained. The Texas senator then provided an excerpt from a letter Sanger wrote in 1939. In the letter, Sanger outlines her plan to reach out to black leaders, particularly ministers, in order to help dispel any suspicion within black communities that she was, in fact, advocating for race-based eugenics.
“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members,” the letter read.
Cruz also circulated additional background of Sanger’s infamous letter, and urged individuals to read the full context.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Yes, PLEASE read full context. In 1926, Sanger spoke at a KKK rally in NJ. Her publications include: &#8220;Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics&#8221; (Jun 1920); &#8220;The Purpose of Eugenics&#8221; (Dec 1924); &#8220;Birth Control &amp; Positive Eugenics&#8221; (July 1925) &amp; &#8220;Birth Control: The True Eugenics&#8221; (Aug 1928). <a href="https://t.co/oTDdfH1c96">https://t.co/oTDdfH1c96</a>
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1160694181175746560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
“In 1926, Sanger spoke at a KKK rally in [New Jersey],” the Texas senator said. “Her publications include ‘Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics’ (June 1920); ‘The Purpose of Eugenics’ (Dec 1924); ‘Birth Control [and] Positive Eugenics’ (July 1925) [and] ‘Birth Control: The True Eugenics’ (Aug 1928).”
Cruz initially stated that more than half of African-American babies are aborted, but quickly corrected himself, noting that nearly half are aborted.
“A slight correction,” Cruz said. “Although some cities (eg NYC) see over 50% abortion rates (in 2012-16 black mothers terminated 136,426 pregnancies [and] gave birth to 118,127 babies), nationally the total is just over 40%.”
“Still tragically high,” he added.
Tribe later attempted to clarify his initial statement, claiming that his remarks were misinterpreted.
“Some have misread this to stay that all those who oppose abortion are White Supremacists!” he <a href="https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1160915552052887552?s=20">tweeted</a>. “Learn to read, folks!”
“I neither said nor believe any such thing,” he continued. “Some X are Y doesn’t translate to all Y are X. Duh.”
Cruz also rebuked a photograph circulating around the internet that falsely showed Sanger speaking to a crowd of hooded Ku Klux Klan members.
“This particular photo is an internet fabrication,” Cruz said. “What is TRUE is that in 1926 Sanger addressed the Women’s Auxiliary of the KKK in Silver Lake, [New Jersey] (she admits this in her autobiography).”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">This particular photo is an Internet fabrication. What is TRUE is that in 1926 Sanger addressed the Women’s Auxiliary of the KKK in Silver Lake, NJ (as she admits in her autobiography). Also, I’m pretty sure that guy in the front row is the guy from Ralph Northam’s yearbook&#8230;. <a href="https://t.co/lugY9kQim5">https://t.co/lugY9kQim5</a>
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1160931668569600001?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
“Also, I’m pretty sure that guy in the front row is the guy from Ralph Northam’s yearbook,” he added, taking a dig at the embattled Virginia governor.

Ted Cruz

Ted Cruz Educates His Former Law Professor On Abortion After Professor Makes Claim About White Supremacy

Abortion

White Supremacy

Harvard Law professor Bruce Hay’s nightmare began on March 7, 2015 — though at the time he had no idea what he was in for.
In a <a href="https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/bruce-hay-paternity-trap-maria-pia-shuman-mischa-haider.html">lengthy but captivating article</a> for New York Magazine’s The Cut, Kera Bolonik exhaustingly detailed Hay’s ordeal back in late July. She reported that Hay had met a woman named Maria-Pia Shuman in a hardware store. Shuman, who had a French accent, told Hay he was attractive and the two struck up a friendship that eventually led to sex. Weeks later, Shuman claimed she was pregnant with Hay’s baby.
The two continued their friendship and Hay became friends with Shuman’s friend, Mischa Haider, a trans woman with mental health issues. Hay was legally divorced from his wife, Jennifer Zacks, but lived with her and their children.
The baby was born in January 2016, but Hay wasn’t allowed to be present during the delivery. Shuman and Haider had been harassing Hay to leave his ex-wife for some time by that point. The harassment escalated. They claimed, according to The Cut, that Hay’s refusal to leave his ex-wife amounted to abuse. Shuman claimed he was “exploiting and manipulating” Haider and that “there should be criminal legal and administrative consequences for your behavior.” They threatened to report him for “raping” Shuman. Haider claimed they would file a complaint with Harvard over his alleged behavior and would accuse him of attempting to “extort” Shuman “for 1 million dollars.”
Hay tried to defuse the situation, but the women continued to escalate it. Eventually, the pair invited Hay to Paris for Bastille Day weekend and even gave him a check for $3,000 for his expenses. Shuman also said she had a surprise for him and needed his computer password, which he handed over since he had provided her with his passwords previously. Shuman told The Cut she never had Hay’s passwords.
At the same time, Hay was helping Shuman and Haider move. The three went to Quebec instead of Paris while the move was to take place. When they returned, all the belongings had been moved out of Hay’s house and the belongings of Shuman and Haider replaced them. Shuman had allegedly used Hay’s password to send emails agreeing to a lease of his home to her and Haider. Hay had signed what he believed were documents for storage units on Shuman’s behalf. Now they had a lease agreement with him and said the $3,000 check was a security deposit.
Hay and his ex-wife went to court and got their house back. Shuman and Haider then filed restraining orders against Hay — which were denied — and sue him for fraud over the house lease, since Hay’s name was no longer on the deed. Haider also filed a formal complaint with Harvard. He has been suspended from teaching while the investigation takes place.
In The Cut’s initial article, three other men had their encounters and legal battles with Shuman and Haider detailed — “Richard Roe,” “John Poe,” and “John Doe.” All three had similar stories. Each had sex with Shuman and told they were the father of her baby, even though the chances were nearly impossible (the men either wore a condom, didn’t ejaculate, or both). The other men had hired lawyers far earlier than Hay and were able to get Shuman and Haider off their backs.
Now, The Cut has published <a href="https://www.thecut.com/2019/08/bruce-hay-paternity-trap-maria-pia-shuman-mischa-haider-follow-up.html">a follow-up story</a>, speaking to six more men who had encounters with a woman believed to be Shuman. One man said the French woman approached them while he was moving into a new apartment with the help of his friend. The woman just walked up to them and propositioned them for sex. The men declined and she got into the back seat of a black car believed to be driven by Haider. Another man said he met Shuman after she approached him in a Starbucks and told him he was attractive. The two planned to meet, but she changed the plans and asked him to pretend to be the father of her child while relatives visited. He declined but she kept contacting him and chastised him for not “politely” declining her ruse. Months later she asked him for sex.
Another man said Shuman approached him, told him he was attractive, and implied they should have sex. When he and his friends were discussing the encounter, another friend arrived and said the same thing had happened to him just a few days earlier. The men called her to confront her but she yelled and hung up. Moments later, she sent one of them a friend request on Facebook, even though he didn’t tell her his name. Another person then called them, who the men believe was Haider. The person berated them and called them “misogynistic pigs” and “pieces-of-shit men.” It was a common theme from Haider and Shuman, who had railed against the patriarchy to Hay.
A friend of Shuman’s contacted The Cut to say Shuman actually had an English accent, though she was half-French (on her mother’s side). She said Shuman abandoned her friends after meeting Haider and the two seemed to enjoy picking up men and discarding them.
“I remember she said, ‘I love corrupting these really Waspy Bostonian guys.’ The impression I got was, if she picked up a guy, told him he was really hot, went back and slept with him and then discarded him, she felt like, ‘I’m in control, I’m so powerful, I used him, I tossed him aside,’” the friend told The Cut. “She liked the idea of corrupting what looked like these innocent, nice guys.”

Man Scratching Head

Harvard Professor’s Fling Turned Into A Nightmare Of False Allegations And Fraud. He’s Not The Only Victim.

Sexual Abuse

Sexual Harassment

This week, Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv announced that Harvard University has withdrawn his acceptance to the college. In the aftermath of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the then-high school junior became a prominent voice for school safety, meeting with politicians across the political spectrum. He was also a prominent defender of Second Amendment rights. After scoring 1550 on his SATs and graduating second in his class, Kashuv was admitted to Harvard, turning down scholarship money at other schools to do so.
Then came the tsunami.
Former classmates who oppose Kashuv&#8217;s politics revealed on social media that when he was 16, months before the Parkland shooting, he typed egregious racist slurs, including the N-word, in a private Google doc. This revelation led Kashuv to immediately apologize publicly for his use of the language, which he insisted was not a reflection of racist belief but a juvenile attempt to shock his peers. He pointed to his record of public-facing accomplishment and pledged to learn from his mistakes. He issued an apology to Harvard, taking full responsibility for his comments; he reached out to the Office of Diversity and Inclusion to see what steps he could take to assure them that he had changed.
No matter. Harvard&#8217;s admissions committee decided to withdraw his acceptance.
There are several lessons here &#8212; all of them bad for the country.
First, grace is no longer an aspect of American life &#8212; at least for one side of the aisle. Kashuv has been in the public eye for a year and a half. In that time, he has acted with remarkable poise, as have many others in his class. The fact that he participated in an idiotic and disgusting private group chat months before the Parkland shooting has had apparently no effect on his public behavior. If the new standard is that past private statements, once surfaced, override all public behavior since &#8212; including apologies, evidence of decency and willingness to evidence repentance &#8212; we are entering a dangerous new era. Is Harvard prepared for dredging up every incoming first year&#8217;s Twitter direct messages for scrutiny?
But that won&#8217;t be the standard, obviously. The commentariat calling for Kashuv&#8217;s expulsion was loudly decrying Harvard for having barred Michelle Jones, who killed her own 4-year-old , just two years ago. The problem for Kashuv is that he is conservative; the old racist slurs were merely a means of damaging him. There is little question that were pro-gun control David Hogg the Parkland survivor at issue rather than Kashuv, a little more grace might have been applied here.
Second, public life comes with inherent risks and thus should be avoided by rational actors. Kashuv would have been admitted to Harvard if he had never engaged in activism: He scored a 1550 on his SAT and graduated second in his class. No one on the radical left or alt-right would have tried to destroy his academic career; no one would have bothered. Kashuv dared to speak up politically and thus became a target. Rational actors will take note and stay away from the public square, leaving that square to the most shameless and the most enigmatic.
Third, Harvard has become an institution not for education but for capitulation to the mob. Forget Kashuv for a second. Focus instead on Harvard Law School professor Ronald Sullivan, a political liberal who was tossed as dean of a residential house for the grave sin of acting as a defense attorney on Harvey Weinstein&#8217;s team. Cross Harvard&#8217;s most radical students or the wokescolds on social media and the administration will capitulate in short order.
Kashuv will be fine. He&#8217;ll move on, go to another school, mature and grow. But Harvard won&#8217;t be a part of that process. The social media mob was motivated not by a desire to purify by our politics &#8212; after all, Ralph Northam is still governor of Virginia &#8212; but by a desire to damage the Parkland student they just didn&#8217;t like.

SHAPIRO: The Dis-Grace Of Harvard

Kyle Kashuv

Kyle Kashuv, the 18-year-old conservative activist and high school shooting survivor, will not attend Harvard next year.
He has the grades and the test scores: a 3.9 GPA and 1550 on his SAT. He has the extracurriculars. For almost a year, Kyle served as the high school outreach director for Turning Point USA, organizing young conservatives throughout the country. He even has an acceptance letter welcoming him to the Harvard College class of 2024. But Harvard has rescinded that acceptance after a political adversary of Kashuv&#8217;s leaked a years-old Google Doc on which he had written the &#8220;n-word&#8221; and other offensive terms.
Kashuv promptly apologized for the childish private remarks. &#8220;We were 16-year-olds making idiotic comments, using callous and inflammatory language in an effort to be as extreme and shocking as possible,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;The comments I made are not indicative of who I am or who I&#8217;ve become in the years since.&#8221;
Of course not. I suspect the comments do not reflect even who he was at 16. On the leaked Google Doc, Kashuv also wrote, &#8220;f*** my a** now NOW&#8221; and &#8220;I WILL LITERALLY F*** YOUR UGLY A** DOG.&#8221; Either Kyle leads a secret double life as a zoophilic, gay racist, or he, like all teenagers, said something outrageous among his friends for shock value.
How many other students admitted to Harvard have ever written or uttered an offensive phrase or racial epithet &#8212; even jokingly, even just once? How many have ever sung along to a rap song or quoted a Quentin Tarantino movie? Does the Harvard College admissions office plan to investigate the private teenage chat logs of the 2,000 students it just admitted?
Surely the admissions officers themselves, up to and including Dean of Admissions William R. Fitzsimmons, have never uttered an untoward remark or made an off-color joke in private. Perhaps some enterprising journalist ought to examine all of their private correspondence from age 16 onward just to make sure.
The cruel irony is that, while there is no evidence that Kyle Kashuv harbors any actual racial bigotry, there is plenty of evidence that Harvard does.
Read the rest <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/michael-knowles-kyle-kashuv-harvard">here</a>.

Knowles At ‘Fox’: Kyle Kashuv Isn&#8217;t Racist, But Harvard Is

Conservatism

Parkland Shooting

Racism

The following is satirical.
Democrats and other small-minded sanctimonious putzes are absolutely shocked at the behavior of teenage Second Amendment supporter Kyle Kashuv. Harvard University rescinded its acceptance of Kashuv because of his support of freedom and the guns required to defend it, but pretended they were doing it because Kashuv used some ugly racist language when he was sixteen in order to shock people because he was sixteen.
Virginia Governor Ralph Northam rushed to condemn Kashuv&#8217;s racist remarks, telling reporters, &#8220;It is utterly disgusting that Kashuv used language so offensive to the race I was pretending to be when I wore blackface while in medical school and posed in a photograph with another student dressed as a Klansman, unless it turns out I was the Klansman in which case the language was okay and I&#8217;m going to burn a cross on Harvard&#8217;s lawn.&#8221;
Rachel Dolezal also weighed in on Kashuv&#8217;s remarks, saying, &#8220;As a former fake black person I am in deep fake shock to hear these ugly remarks about the race I was pretending to be when I conned my way into a job at the NAACP and a job teaching African Studies at East Washington University. The sort of language Kashuv used could incite the sort of hate crimes I pretended were committed against me when I pretended I was attacked for the race I pretended being.&#8221;
Another offended Democrat was presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, who told a gathering of supporters, &#8220;As a former fake Native American, I feel a sense of connection with all fake minorities and all the fake prejudice they and I have pretended to suffer through the years. It&#8217;s dopey 16-year-olds saying stupid stuff they don&#8217;t really believe that has set fake race relations back to the point where we can fake being shocked in order to distract from what we&#8217;re really up to, and that&#8217;s what Harvard has done.&#8221;
All in all, Democrats agree that Kashuv&#8217;s idiotic adolescent remarks are a tremendous fake insult to all the fake minorities throughout the Democrat party.

Fake Minorities Are Fake Shocked By Fake Scandal [Satire]

Democratic Party

Race

Satire

The radical Left claimed its latest trophy this week, as Harvard University rescinded Kyle Kashuv&#8217;s admission to its undergraduate class of 2023. With yet another head thrust upon the outrage mob&#8217;s ideological spike, and another person&#8217;s life ruined by the clawing hands of the faceless masses, we must fight to protect three basic truths.
Children Are Humans, Not Weapons
Like all things in the eyes of the radical Left, children are seen as political tools. The Left truly adores children who are willing to become the flag-bearers of its agenda. Look to the adulation poured upon Swedish climate change advocate Greta Thunberg, or the endless media attention dedicated to the outspoken (and often controversial) gun control advocate David Hogg. Every child who is willing to become the Left&#8217;s voice-piece is immediately promoted as a mainstream authority figure, with supposed youthful innocence or sincerity acting as a convenient proxy for actual substantive knowledge.
As those who spend their time in the trenches of social media know full well, many on the Left blindly idolize their figures of allocated authority and often demonstrate complete and utter contempt for those who do not conform &#8212; especially when these nonconformists belong to an intersectional group under the &#8220;protection&#8221; of the Left. The result is the destruction of characters like Kashuv, with cheers of delight as the mob witnesses their downfall.
Kashuv made the mistake of swimming against the tide by refusing to allow himself to be used as a leftist pawn in the aftermath of the Parkland school shooting. Any such victim who is unwilling to allow his shoulders to become the foundation of leftist propaganda must eventually pay the price, and the Left&#8217;s macabre method of retrospective vengeance finally found its target in Kashuv.
Time Is Not Static
Time is a selectively malleable construct for those on the Left who hope to weaponize the past of their ideological enemies. It is uncontroversial to argue that most teenagers are emotionally and socially immature and, as a result, say or do immature (or even appalling) things. It is also uncontroversial to argue that we are not the same people at every stage of our lives. As our brains develop, our behavior develops, as does our opinion of our past selves. This is true year-on-year, if not day-by-day. It is certainly true if the child in question experiences a traumatic and life-flashing-before-your-eyes type of event, such as the Parkland school shooting, which may forever alter the individual and his perception of his past behavior.
Setting aside the undeniable fact that his language was despicable (Kashuv himself has admitted this publicly), his actions occurred months before the Parkland shooting &#8212; months before he became a public figure. We must acknowledge that his actions occurred as part of a timeline of human growth and progression, and that the 18-year-old Kyle Kashuv is not the 16-year-old Kyle Kashuv being condemned.
With our past becoming locked in an immortal electronic database, we must be forced to decide how we delineate human development. With many children holding some form of online identity at increasingly younger ages, there has to be some form of objective metric by which we measure behavior, and by which we can compare behavior across developmental stages.
Many will argue that Kyle Kashuv&#8217;s behavior was that of a stupid 16-year-old, but as an 18-year-old who has genuinely repented, he should be forgiven. However, we must also ask the broader question: What timeline should be used when it comes to rendering judgment? Would the Left have reacted with equal fury if Kyle Kashuv had used that same language as a 14-year-old? What about as a particularly vocal 1-year-old? If yes, can we ever escape our past?
Unless we can acknowledge the clear fact that we are forever developing, and that our past selves are often inferior versions of our current selves, we will be reduced to living as stagnant prisoners of our possibly immature and reckless childhood states.
Apologies Are Virtuous
The overwhelming reaction to Kyle Kashuv&#8217;s former actions demonstrates that the virtue of apology seems to be dying a slow and painful death. As discussed in <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/11/left-doesnt-want-public-apologies-wants-public-self-immolation/">The Federalist</a>, this problem has been developing for some time. Apologies are not sought after in the hope of repentance or remorse, but to enforce an act of servile capitulation to the radical Left.
It is undeniable that Kashuv faced this public wave of criticism honorably, and his apology was offered sincerely and without equivocation. But that did not stop the bloodthirsty mob from calling for him to be preemptively expelled from Harvard, or from cheering with joy when the elite American university gladly obliged. Time and time again, we find that the act of apology leads inevitably to complete and public self-immolation. This leads us to ask the terrifying question: &#8220;Why apologize?&#8221;
In this modern world where our pasts are torn to shreds in order to uncover former misdeeds, where these misdeeds are weaponized to destroy our lives or livelihoods, we are left with a clear choice. The first option is to continue to do the honorable thing and acknowledge our wrongdoings: Own your mistakes, apologize publicly, and attempt to learn and grow. This act, which sacrifices one&#8217;s ego in favor of what is right, used to be hailed as a sign of virtue. However, the second option has become the only option which does not result in utter self-destruction: Deny and deflect. When faced with legitimate criticism, respond with a shameless refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing.
As a society, we are truly on the edge of a moral abyss. Either we return to the virtuous world where we encourage and value apologies, or we continue to spiral downwards by rewarding those who don&#8217;t apologize while screaming for the blood of those who do.
Regardless of how you feel about Kashuv, we should no longer allow mobs fueled by artificial outrage to destroy the lives of those who dare to oppose the mainstream Left. We should fight for a return to a world of virtue, instead of a world of moral destruction.
Kyle Kashuv is not alone. He is one of countless men and women who have moments in their past they regret &#8212; moments which define a person who no longer exists. Unfortunately for Kashuv, he entered the public fray and swam against the tide. When objectively criticized for his past behavior, Kashuv did the honorable thing and apologized. His reward was to have his academic future sacrificed in order to silence the hordes massing at the gates.
We&#8217;re in a battle for &#8220;sorry&#8221; over &#8220;not sorry.&#8221; Let&#8217;s pick the right side.

HAWORTH: Harvard Destroyed Kyle Kashuv&#8217;s Virtuous Apology

Education

Leftism

Political Correctness

Progressivism

Our universities may be irrevocably broken.
On Monday, Parkland survivor and outspoken conservative Kyle Kashuv announced that Harvard University had withdrawn his admission from the school over the revelation of racist, offensive, idiotic posts written on a private Google document with friends when he was sixteen years old. Never mind that Kashuv apologized publicly for the comments; never mind that his public behavior has evinced no racism whatsoever.
Forgiveness must be withheld.
Kashuv explained:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
1/ THREAD: Harvard rescinded my acceptance.
Three months after being admitted to Harvard Class of 2023, Harvard has decided to rescind my admission over texts and comments made nearly two years ago, months prior to the shooting.
I have some thoughts. Here&#8217;s what happened.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605133346283521?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
2/ A few weeks ago, I was made aware of egregious and callous comments classmates and I made privately years ago &#8211; when I was 16 years old, months before the shooting &#8211; in an attempt to be as extreme and shocking as possible.
I immediately apologized.
Here is my apology: <a href="https://t.co/eI38ziiQE8">pic.twitter.com/eI38ziiQE8</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605144368898049?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
3/ After I issued this apology, speculative articles were written, my peers used the opportunity to attack me, and my life was once again reduced to a headline.
It sent me into one of the darkest spirals of my life.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605147313266688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
4/ After the story broke, former peers &amp; political opponents began contacting Harvard urging them to rescind me. Harvard then sent this letter stating that Harvard &#8220;reserves the right to withdraw an offer of admission&#8221; and requested a written explanation within 72 hours. <a href="https://t.co/RfEQCvjgDX">pic.twitter.com/RfEQCvjgDX</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605153789272064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
5/ I responded to the letter with a full explanation, apology, and requested documents. <a href="https://t.co/yWd6FeKWOJ">pic.twitter.com/yWd6FeKWOJ</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605163721437189?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
6/ I also sent an email to the Office of Diversity and Inclusion to seek guidance on how to right this wrong and work with them once I was on campus. <a href="https://t.co/3M1UEXXeQm">pic.twitter.com/3M1UEXXeQm</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605171644403712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
7/ Harvard decided to rescind my admission with the following letter. <a href="https://t.co/P3bLkF3hHn">pic.twitter.com/P3bLkF3hHn</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605179311656962?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
8/ Somewhat ironically, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion sent me this response regarding my apology:
&#8220;Thank you for your email. We appreciate your thoughtful reflections and look forward to connecting with you upon your matriculation in the fall of 2020&#8230;&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/YUX67QW3KE">pic.twitter.com/YUX67QW3KE</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605185921863680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
9/ After receiving Harvard&#8217;s letter revoking my acceptance, I responded by asking for the opportunity to have an in-person meeting to make my case face to face and work towards any possible path of reconciliation.
Harvard responded by declining my meeting request. <a href="https://t.co/rdsGU7BhjD">pic.twitter.com/rdsGU7BhjD</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605195052863488?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
10/ Harvard deciding that someone can&#8217;t grow, especially after a life-altering event like the shooting, is deeply concerning. If any institution should understand growth, it&#8217;s Harvard, which is looked to as the pinnacle of higher education despite its checkered past.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605198035017728?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
11/ Throughout its history, Harvard&#8217;s faculty has included slave owners, segregationists, bigots and antisemites. If Harvard is suggesting that growth isn&#8217;t possible and that our past defines our future, then Harvard is an inherently racist institution.
But I don&#8217;t believe that.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605199414943744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
12/ I believe that institutions and people can grow. I&#8217;ve said that repeatedly.
In the end, this isn&#8217;t about me, it&#8217;s about whether we live in a society in which forgiveness is possible or mistakes brand you as irredeemable, as Harvard has decided for me.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140605200920719360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
13/ So what now? I&#8217;m figuring it out.
I had given up huge scholarships in order to go to Harvard, and the deadline for accepting other college offers has ended.
I&#8217;m exploring all options at the moment.
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1140611008798629888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
As far as his Harvard qualifications, they weren&#8217;t based on his activism. Kashuv was ranked second in his class, with a weighted GPA of 5.345 and an unweighted GPA of 3.9; he scored a 1550 on his SATs. But Kashuv&#8217;s activism has been impressive nonetheless: he has worked consistently across the aisle to bring about school safety measures to protect other high schoolers, and that his terrible comments were written before the life-changing event the mass shooting at Parkland represented.
Kashuv&#8217;s comments were originally surfaced by fellow students who oppose him politically, in an overt attempt to damage him. Kashuv did the right thing and issued an immediate apology:
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
A quick note on callous comments I made a few years ago in high school that are circulating. <a href="https://t.co/E6Ki6XIhtc">pic.twitter.com/E6Ki6XIhtc</a>
&#8212; Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) <a href="https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1131395413938966528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
In a normal world, this would have been enough. Kashuv is 18 years old, and he wrote the comments when he was 16. He didn&#8217;t commit a crime; he didn&#8217;t espouse his gross views publicly; his behavior since has not mimicked any of the content or attitude of the comments. He also underwent a life-changing trauma &#8212; the kind of trauma that has provided an unbreakable shield of protection from the media for all other Parkland survivors. Hell, criticizing outspoken anti-gun activist David Hogg was considered an act of extreme evil by the mainstream media, an act worthy of advertiser boycott.
Not for Kashuv.
His apology wasn&#8217;t sufficient, Harvard determined. Instead, Harvard University issued a letter asking Kashuv to explain his comments or face the rescinding of his attendance.
Before responding to the main email, Kashuv wrote this one to the Office of Diversity Education and Support:
<blockquote>
Around two years ago, when I was 16 years old, before the mass shooting that occurred at my high school, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, I was part of a group in which we used abhorrent racial slurs. We did so out of a misplaced sense of humor: we treated the words themselves as though they bore little weight, and used them only for their shock value. Looking back two years later, I cannot recognize that person. I make absolutely no excuse for those comments. I said them, and I regret them deeply. I bore no racial animus whatsoever: the context was a group of adolescents trying to use the worst words and say the most insane things imaginable. The horrible things I said were not directed to any specific person or individual, and my intent was never to hurt anyone.
I do not have access to the electronic record of that conversation and do not recall other things that may have been said; I have only seen what has appeared in the media. When reminded of those comments, I immediately apologized publicly, knowing that there would be an immediate media uproar, given that I have become a public figure over the past year. That uproar did ensue, and I have continued to accept responsibility for my comments, and I accept fully the resulting legitimate criticism. I am entirely embarrassed and do not recognize the person who wrote those things.
As you may not know, I had already intended to take a gap year to continue my school safety activism, before beginning my studies in the fall of 2020. I will hope to enter Harvard as a more mature member of the community, with three years and many life experiences between the foolish child who said those things two years ago and the man I am today and wish to become in the future.
I am deeply sorry for my past comments, I know I am not the same person. But I realize there is always more I can do to understand and learn about the struggle and pain of minority communities in America and worldwide. During my gap year, I will supplement my activism to include reaching out to minority communities. I am open to any advice or suggestions on activities I might pursue during my gap year in pursuit of that goal. I am committed to engaging on this issue, and I plan to visit your office when I arrive at Harvard in the fall of 2020 after I complete my gap year.
</blockquote>
Then Kashuv wrote this response to William Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions and financial aid:
<blockquote>
Dear Mr. Fitzsimmons:
Thank you for the opportunity to elaborate on what has been a very difficult and painful public controversy, which has left me with feelings of deep regret over an episode I had long forgotten. Let me first state that I apologize unequivocally for my comments, which were made two years ago in private among equally immature high school students. In the attached document, I have attached all the comments I have been able to record. I do not have access to the electronic record of that conversation and do not recall other things that may have been said; I have only seen what has appeared in the media. I take full responsibility for the idiotic and hurtful things I wrote two years ago. I make absolutely no excuse for those comments. I said them, I regret them, and by explaining the context and my subsequent experiences I am not trying to excuse them. Instead, I am seeking to demonstrate the hurtful things I said do not represent the man I am today.
I understand Harvard&#8217;s concern over these offensive statements from my past, and I further understand that Harvard has been contacted about them by people expressing concern about them. I am very sorry to have put the College in this position. I am determined to take whatever steps are necessary to rectify this past wrong and to reassure Harvard of my commitment to values of tolerance, diversity, and inclusion, which I hope to advance as a member of the class of 2024.
This is the context in which I made these comments. While this does not excuse my comments, I made poor choices with regards to the people I surrounded myself with, I became part of a group in which those words bore little weight and were used only in a means for their shock value. I bore no racial animus; the context was a group of adolescents trying to use the worst words and say the most insane things imaginable. Until these writings were disclosed, I had long forgotten about them. While I will forever bear incredible shame for typing them, I especially feel remorse now that they have been made public knowing they have caused terrible pain to people I care about. I gave no consideration to the meaning and weight of the words I wrote in an effort to impress then friends and classmates, and looking back I know clearly know I wrote terrible things I can never unwrite.
My intent was never to hurt anyone, and to do so would have magnified the harm immensely. I also feel I am no longer the same person, especially in the aftermath of the Parkland shooting and all that has transpired since. I had to mature not only to address that horrible situation but to fulfill my new role as a school safety activist. I have tried hard to be a better man in honor of the friends I lost, and I believe I have grown and matured significantly through this experience. I am proud of some of the things I have accomplished in the wake of that tragedy, and I do not recognize the person who wrote those things.
When I was reminded of the writings I was mortified and embarrassed. My parents raised me to be better than what is represented in those screenshots from about two years ago. In an effort to be as honest and transparent as possible, I immediately apologized publicly when reminded of those messages, while knowing the media uproar that would ensue. It did ensue, and I have continued to accept responsibility and the resulting legitimate criticism.
As you know, I intend to take a gap year before beginning my studies to continue my work promoting school safety. I will continue to mature and will enter Harvard with three years and many life experiences between the foolish child who said those things and the man I am today. As an aspiring member of the Harvard community, I aspire to the values that the community strives to uphold. Therefore I have already written to the Harvard College Office of Diversity Education and Support both to express my deepest apologies and remorse, and to reach out to begin a dialogue that I hope will be the foundation of future growth. While I am no longer the same person who wrote those comments, there is always more to learn: especially about the legacy of racism in our society.
Thank you again for this opportunity to address these issues. I hope this fully addresses your concerns, but if not I would be happy to provide any further information or discussion you require.
</blockquote>
No good. Harvard sent Kashuv a blunt letter kicking him out of Harvard:
<blockquote>
Dear Mr. Kashuv,
Thank you for your response to our letter of May 24. The Admissions Committee has discussed at length your account of the communications about which we asked, and we appreciated your candor and your expressions of regret for sending them.
As you know, the Committee takes seriously the qualifies of maturity and moral character. After careful consideration the Committee voted to rescind your admission to Harvard College.
We are sorry about the circumstances that have led us to withdraw your admission, and we wish you success in your future academic endeavors and beyond.
</blockquote>
This is, to put it mildly, gutless. There are ex-convicts who, quite properly, have been admitted to Harvard &#8212; they earned forgiveness. There are current students who undoubtedly have said things privately that would shock the conscience. There are likely administrators who have said things when they were 16 years old that embarrass them now. Is the new standard that if you said something on a private message board when you were 16 years old that we should deny you the possibility of a degree at a top college, so long as those who join you on that message board decide to out you?
This isn&#8217;t about Kashuv&#8217;s politics. I&#8217;ve worked with other Parkland survivors including Cameron Kasky, with whom I disagree politically, but who happens to be a wonderful young man &#8212; I would certainly defend him if something similar happened to him. I&#8217;ve defended Sarah Jeong of The New York Times from calls to be fired over her old tweets; I&#8217;ve done the same with James Gunn; I&#8217;ve even suggested that Virginia Governor Ralph Northam ought to be judged based on his lifelong career record on race, not based on a racist yearbook photo. I&#8217;ve stumped against the social media bannings of people with whom I virulently disagree &#8212; people who have in fact targeted me personally.
This move by Harvard is the worst move I&#8217;ve ever seen in academia &#8212; and it represents the establishment of a standard so insane that no one can possibly withstand it. All those who have never written an embarrassing thing privately, please step forward. Not so fast, SJWs.
The move comes just three weeks after Harvard University fired Professor Ronald Sullivan and his wife Stephanie from their deanships at Winthrop House over the apparently unforgiveable sin of Sullivan&#8217;s representation of alleged rapist Harvey Weinstein. Sullivan was ousted because students said they were offended by Sullivan doing what he&#8217;s always done: defending alleged criminals. Over at Yale, Professor Nicholas Christakis and his wife Erica were effectively ousted from their roles as co-masters of Silliman House because they suggested that perhaps students shouldn&#8217;t take offense at Halloween costumes. Over at Evergreen College, Professor Bret Weinstein and his wife Professor Heather Heying were forced out over Weinstein&#8217;s refusal to stop teaching for a &#8220;Day of Absence&#8221; for white teachers.
Our colleges are irreparably broken; the inmates are in charge of the asylum.
Kyle Kashuv acted like a dumb kid. He&#8217;s remorseful. Denying him the chance to prove it is horrifying. And if the new standard is that anyone whose old comments are resurfaced for fun and games can have their life ruined, no one will survive. I look forward to tasking my reporters with digging up everything everyone on the admissions committee has ever said. If these are the new rules, so be it.
But these are, apparently, the new rules. Kashuv is the first to feel the brunt. He certainly won&#8217;t be the last.

Harvard Rescinds Admission To Conservative Kyle Kashuv Over Private Racist Remarks He Wrote At 16, Despite Apology And Evidence Of Growth. This Is Disgusting.

On Thursday, Harvard Law School&#8217;s longtime leftist constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe, who has notably floated such fringe constitutional theories as <a href="https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/03/08/1418675/0/en/Habeas-Corpus-Experts-Offer-Support-for-Chimpanzee-Rights-Cases.html">advocating for the constitutional rights of chimpanzees</a>, took to Twitter to blast Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) as a &#8220;dickh***.&#8221;
&#8220;Hypocrisy is McTurtle&#8217;s middle name. And his first and last name too. What a flagrant dickh***!&#8221; Tribe tweeted.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Hypocrisy is McTurtle&#8217;s middle name. And his first and last name too. What a flagrant dickhead! <a href="https://t.co/17vKziC2eJ">https://t.co/17vKziC2eJ</a>
&#8212; Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) <a href="https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1134171046725242882?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Accompanying the tweet, Tribe linked to an underlying <a href="https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2019/05/30/mitch-mcconnell-says-he-would-confirm-a-supreme-court-nominee-in-2020">article</a> in The Economist that discusses McConnell&#8217;s announcement that he would lead a confirmation vote for a President Donald Trump-nominated U.S. Supreme Court in the election year of 2020. Per The Economist:
<blockquote>
WHEN ANTONIN SCALIA died suddenly in 2016, Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, wasted no time staking out the Republican position on the conservative jurist&#8217;s successor. Hours after news broke of Mr Scalia&#8217;s demise, Mr McConnell declared that &#8220;the American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice&#8221;. With nearly nine months to go before the presidential election, he told America that his legislative chamber would take no action on any Supreme Court nominee named by Barack Obama. &#8220;This vacancy&#8221;, he announced, articulating a broad principle, &#8220;should not be filled until we have a new president.&#8221;
It was an aggressive move. The constitution gives presidents the power to nominate federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, and the Senate&#8217;s &#8220;advice and consent&#8221; are necessary before they take their seats. But Mr McConnell took the unprecedented step of building a blockade around Scalia&#8217;s seat rather than give a hearing to Merrick Garland, the moderate chief judge of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals nominated by Mr Obama. After stonewalling Judge Garland for the remaining 11 months of Mr Obama&#8217;s term, the Republican Senate avidly took up Donald Trump&#8217;s nominee, the highly conservative Neil Gorsuch. He was confirmed on April 7, 2017.
</blockquote>
The Economist, a formerly right-of-center publication, has often trended in recent years toward being staunchly anti-Trump. For example, there was actually <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/mcconnell-no-lame-duck-vote-on-garland-221006">no shortage of historical precedent</a> for the so-called &#8220;aggressive&#8221; move to leave the Justice Antonin Scalia-vacated Supreme Court seat unfilled in a presidential election year. Furthermore, it is highly questionable whether Justice Neil Gorsuch, while no doubt a firmly right-of-center jurist, is <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/gorsuch-dead-wrong-immigration/">best described as &#8220;highly conservative.&#8221;</a>
Tribe has been afflicted with a particularly acute case of &#8220;Trump Derangement Syndrome,&#8221; based on his alarmist and crude Twitter feed, but has also publicly advocated for some bizarre legal theories. Just last year, Globe NewsWire <a href="https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/03/08/1418675/0/en/Habeas-Corpus-Experts-Offer-Support-for-Chimpanzee-Rights-Cases.html">reported</a> on Tribe&#8217;s advocacy for the purported constitutional rights of chimpanzees:
<blockquote>
The Nonhuman Rights Project announced today that legal advocacy organization the Center for Constitutional Rights and law professors Laurence H. Tribe (Harvard Law), Justin Marceau (University of Denver Sturm College of Law), and Samuel R. Wiseman (Florida State University College of Law) have submitted amicus curiae briefs in support of the NhRP&#8217;s motion for permission to appeal to New York&#8217;s highest court in the cases of captive chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko. &#8230;
The brief submitted by Laurence H. Tribe (Carl M. Loeb University Professor and Professional of Constitutional Law at Harvard University) asks the Court of Appeals to &#8220;recognize that Tommy and Kiko are autonomous beings who are currently detained and who are therefore entitled to challenge the lawfulness of their detention by petitioning for the writ, even if that court ultimately concludes that their detention is lawful.&#8221; This is the third such brief Tribe has submitted in support of the NhRP.
</blockquote>
One can presume that the <a href="https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/12/11683/">pro-abortion Tribe</a> does not feel the same way about unborn human children as he feels about chimpanzees.
Tribe is also not exactly known as a model of intellectual consistency, as Ed Whelan recently <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/larry-tribe-repudiates-larry-tribe-on-senate-duty-to-act-on-supreme-court-nominee/">noted</a> at National Review&#8217;s &#8220;Bench Memos&#8221; blog in a piece entitled, &#8220;Larry Tribe Repudiates Larry Tribe on Senate Duty to Act on Supreme Court Nominee&#8221;:
<blockquote>
Back in early March 2016, a few weeks after Justice Scalia&#8217;s death created a vacancy on the Supreme Court, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe was perhaps the most prominent of some 350 law professors to sign a <a href="https://www.afj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Law-professor-SCOTUS-vacancy-letter.pdf">letter</a> asserting that the Senate had a &#8220;constitutional duty to give President Barack Obama&#8217;s Supreme Court nominee a prompt and fair hearing and a timely vote.&#8221; Declaring that &#8220;[t]he Senate&#8217;s obligation in this circumstance is clear,&#8221; the letter invoked the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. &#8230;
I&#8217;m pleased to discover that Tribe now agrees that the Senate does not have a constitutional duty to take any action on a Supreme Court nominee.
Yesterday I was <a href="https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/vol132_TribeMatz-1.pdf">reading</a> through an essay by Tribe and Joshua Matz that responded to a review of their jointly authored book To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment, published in May 2018. In that <a href="https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/689-724_Online.pdf">review</a>, I ran across their statement (p. 97) that in their book they opened their analysis of the power of impeachment &#8220;by considering&#8212;and squarely rejecting&#8212;arguments that the Senate violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution when it declined to hold confirmation hearings for Chief Judge Garland.&#8221; Wondering if Tribe had really reversed himself or whether I was somehow misreading that statement, I found confirmation in their book &#8230;
</blockquote>

Crazed Leftist Harvard Law Professor Unloads Vulgar Nickname On McConnell

Constitution

Twitter

I have no love for left-wing, Hillary-promoting Hollywood producer and accused #MeToo villain Harvey Weinstein. Nor am I a fan of those who perpetrated the cop-bashing &#8220;Hands Up, Don&#8217;t Shoot&#8221; fiction involving social justice martyr Michael Brown. But I do strongly believe that a grave injustice has been committed by Harvard&#8217;s witch-hunt mobsters against a law professor who joined Weinstein&#8217;s legal team and had represented Brown&#8217;s family in a civil suit against Ferguson, Missouri.
Too bad Ivy League elitist bubbles have purged themselves of people with the backbone, integrity, and courage to end the madness.
Ronald Sullivan, faculty dean of the undergraduate dorm Winthrop House, was terminated from the honored position after hysterical student protesters condemned his decision to take on Weinstein&#8217;s case as &#8220;trauma-inducing.&#8221; Protests, sit-ins, temper tantrums, an online Change.org petition and even litigation by offended female students created pressure on the university for months. The administration sought to appease the mob with a &#8220;climate review,&#8221; no doubt hoping to quell the rebellion against Sullivan as the school year came to a close. No dice. Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana announced over the weekend that both Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, co-faculty dean at Winthrop House, will be removed on June 30.
It is worth noting a few things about Sullivan that you would think would provide an immunity shield from the SJW pot-stirrers. Sullivan boasted impeccable liberal credentials: president of the Black Law Students Association in the 1990s and current adviser to the group; director of the law school&#8217;s Criminal Justice Institute; former lead counsel at the Washington, D.C. Public Defender&#8217;s Office; and head of the Brooklyn, New York, conviction review unit, which has exonerated 25 men to date and remains a model for similar units across the country.
&#8220;When he was first appointed,&#8221; exoneration lawyer Oscar Michelen recounted this week, &#8220;I dropped everything I was doing and drove up to Otisville Correctional Facility to meet with my then-client David McCallum to tell him that finally, after years and years of struggle to prove his and his deceased co-defendant&#8217;s Willie Stuckey&#8217;s innocence, we at last were finally going to be heard. I couldn&#8217;t guarantee his exoneration, but I could guarantee that we would be treated fairly with Sullivan at the helm. And we were right &#8212; not just because he agreed with us and recommended vacating the convictions, but because we were treated with respect and given all the time we need to plead our case. Sullivan set the tone and demeanor of the Unit, which was that justice would be served regardless of the outcome and with dignity and respect for all participants. And this &#8212; this is the man Harvard students don&#8217;t trust?!? He makes you uncomfortable?!?&#8221;
Yes, this is the man that feminist mau-mau-ers accused of posing a threat to their well-being because honoring due process and the presumption of innocence shows he &#8220;does not value the safety of students he lives with in Winthrop House.&#8221;
Danukshi Mudannayake, a staff member of the Harvard Crimson, spearheaded the lynching of Sullivan &#8212; and, in a flabbergasting demonstration of guilt-by-association vindictiveness, his wife. An ecstatic Mudannakaye told The New York Times she was &#8220;proud&#8221; of her school, which she said was indulging in a &#8220;celebratory&#8221; climate after the axe fell on Sullivan and Robinson. Scalpers love blood.
Never mind the horrific implications for any criminal defense attorney, any wrongfully accused defendant and any professor who genuinely believes in and practices the Sixth Amendment. Or the First, Fifth, Eighth or 14th amendments. All it takes is for unhinged rabble-rousers to heat up the &#8220;climate&#8221; and bam, you&#8217;re outta there.
First, they came for Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh. Now, they come for model leftist lawyers with unassailable credentials. Lawlessness reigns in the ivory tower. Cowardice trumps sacred constitutional principles. This is the inevitable consequence of decades of identity politics uber alles indoctrination.
The &#8220;progressives&#8221; are eating their own. And, after persecuting constitutional conservatives among faculty, students, speakers and donors, there is no one left to stand guard against the rabid hounds. Good luck with that.
Michelle Malkin&#8217;s email address is writemalkin@gmail.com. To find out more about Michelle Malkin and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

MALKIN: Harvard&#8217;s Insatiable Identity-Politics Cannibals

Harvey Weinstein

Social Justice

The College Board, the company that writes and administers the SAT college entrance exam to thousands of American high schoolers, says it&#8217;s revamping its scoring process to include an &#8220;adversity score&#8221; alongside the SAT&#8217;s standardized measurements of verbal and mathematical prowess, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The &#8220;adversity score&#8221; will take into account the social and economic backgrounds of SAT takers, and will be awarded based on a 15-factor analysis, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/sat-to-give-students-adversity-score-to-capture-social-and-economic-background-11557999000">The Wall Street Journal reports</a>. Students will be judged on &#8220;the crime rate and poverty levels of the student&#8217;s high school and neighborhood,&#8221; the student&#8217;s &#8220;housing environment,&#8221; the student&#8217;s parents&#8217; income and education levels, and whether the student had access to higher-level and advanced placement (AP) classes.
&#8220;A score of 50 is considered &#8216;average,'&#8221; according to the WSJ. Scores above 50 indicate hardship. Scores below 50 indicate that a student is &#8220;privileged.&#8221; College admissions advisers will access the scores through the SAT&#8217;s online score reporting system, in a tab labeled &#8220;Overall Disadvantage Level.&#8221;
It appears students will not be able to view &#8212; or, more importantly, challenge &#8212; their adversity scores.
The College Board justified the new adversity score by claiming that low SAT scores aren&#8217;t always the result of poor academic performance, and that colleges, who are relying less and less on diversity quotas, should be aware of any exculpatory evidence that might explain a poor SAT performance.
&#8220;There are a number of amazing students who may have scored less (on the SAT) but have accomplished more,&#8221; David Coleman, CEO of The College Board told the WSJ. &#8220;We can&#8217;t sit on our hands and ignore the disparities of wealth reflected in the SAT.&#8221;
So far, about 50 schools, including Yale University, have experimented with the SAT adversity score in a beta test that began last year. The College Board expects to add an additional 100 schools to its roster this year.
Yale, at least, has been happy with the results. &#8220;This (adversity score) is literally affecting every application we look at,&#8221; a Yale admissions dean told the WSJ. &#8220;It has been a part of the success story to help diversify our freshman class.&#8221;
Ultimately, the adversity scores also help colleges and universities skirt limitations put on how they can assess an applicant&#8217;s more personal qualifications.
The adversity score may become especially necessary in an era when schools are facing greater scrutiny in how they admit students. In addition to recent scandals, laying bare a pay-for-play scheme that had wealthy and celebrity parents paying millions to non-profits in order to secure berths at the nation&#8217;s top schools, Harvard University is facing a lawsuit alleging that the school&#8217;s admissions department deliberately discriminated against highly-qualified Asian and Asian-American applicants by giving them &#8220;low &#8216;personal&#8217; ratings that take into account traits such as leadership and likability,&#8221; <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/16/us/sat-adversity-score/index.html">according to CNN</a>.
The Supreme Court has wavered on whether schools can use quotas to help create a more ethnically diverse student body, but cautioned schools not to make self-reported application data a deciding factor on whether to admit a student. The adversity score might allow admissions advisers to assess a student&#8217;s background without asking specific questions and without openly classifying members of their applicant pools based on their own internal system.

The SAT Is Adding An &#8216;Adversity Score&#8217; To Judge Students On &#8216;Social And Economic&#8217; Background

Yale

Longtime Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz has accused his own academic institution of succumbing to McCarthyism for the firing of professor Ron Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, from their positions as co-deans of Winthrop House simply because Sullivan represents a man accused of rape.
&#8220;The defendant is the highly controversial <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/harvey-weinstein-sexual-assault-case-move-forward" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Harvey Weinstein</a>, who is presumed innocent and has not yet been tried,&#8221; Dershowitz wrote in a <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/alan-dershowitz-mccarthyism-harvard-winthrop-house-sullivan-weinstein">Fox News op-ed</a>.
Dershowitz noted that lawyers reserve the right to represent anyone accused of any crime without fear of repercussions. He harkened back to the 1950s and 1960s, when lawyers who represented Communists or civil rights activists were fired from academic positions. The difference between Sullivan and those cases, however, is the university&#8217;s reasoning. In those days, the firings were politically motivated; in Sullivan&#8217;s case, the firing stemmed from student complaints.
&#8220;Many troubling arguments have been offered in defense of the decision not to renew Sullivan&#8217;s role as dean of Winthrop House,&#8221; Dershowitz noted. &#8220;The most common &#8212; and dangerous &#8212; is that students feel &#8216;unsafe&#8217; around a lawyer who is representing Weinstein.&#8221;
&#8220;Feeling &#8216;unsafe&#8217; is the new mantra for the new McCarthyism,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;It is a totally phony argument not deserving of any serious consideration. Any student who feels unsafe in the presence of two distinguished lawyers doesn&#8217;t belong at a university. They should leave and not force the firing of the professor. The &#8216;unsafe argument&#8217; could be made against a dean who is gay, Black, Muslim, Jewish, Republican or libertarian. No credence should be given to the argument, especially since the students apparently did not feel &#8216;unsafe&#8217; when Sullivan was representing a convicted double murderer.&#8221;
Dershowitz was referring to Sullivan&#8217;s previous defense of ex-NFL New England Patriots player Aaron Hernandez.
By allowing students to dictate the law faculty based on how comfortable the person&#8217;s clients (past or present) make the students feel, Dershowitz argued that Harvard set a dangerous precedent that could lead to serious repercussions in the long term.
&#8220;It shows a complete lack of leadership by those in charge and willingness to pander to students no matter how irrational their arguments,&#8221; wrote Dershowitz. &#8220;It also reflects an unwillingness to accept the presumption of innocence. One colleague of mine put it well when he said that &#8216;Some people regard rape so heinous a crime that even innocence should not be accepted as a defense.'&#8221;
Harvard had already been treading this dangerous path of hectoring faculty based on the outcries of an angry mob long before Sullivan, and for far less serious offenses. In 2005, Harvard President Larry Summers faced a cavalcade of hate for suggesting that sexual differences between men and women may be partially responsible for the dearth of female representation in STEM fields. He <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers#Resignation_as_Harvard_President">resigned one year later</a>, presumably at least partially because of the intense backlash and accusations of sexism.
Students at George Mason University recently protested to have Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46172/george-mason-university-president-has-painful-news-paul-bois">ousted from teaching</a> a summer course in England; fortunately, President Angel Cabrera told them all to take a hike.

Dershowitz: McCarthyism Has Come To Harvard

Alan Dershowitz

After students whined about a faculty dean &#8212; who is also an attorney and law professor &#8212; who is defending Harvey Weinstein, Harvard University caved.
Ronald S. Sullivan Jr. and his wife have been the faculty deans of Harvard&#8217;s Winthrop House for the past 10 years, according to The New York Times. Since 2009, there have been no complaints about the couple, who were the first African-American deans at Harvard.
&#8220;But when Mr. Sullivan joined the defense team of Mr. Weinstein, the Hollywood producer, in January, many students expressed dismay, saying that his decision to represent a person accused of abusing women disqualified Mr. Sullivan from serving in a role of support and mentorship to students. Mr. Weinstein is scheduled to go to trial in September in Manhattan on rape and related charges,&#8221; the Times reported.
Harvard students apparently can&#8217;t separate the law from their feelings, and so Sullivan had to go. Administrators conducted a &#8220;climate review&#8221; of the residential house. As the Times reported, students even staged a sit-in and filed a lawsuit over the situation. Finally, Rakesh Khurana, Dean of Harvard College, caved.
&#8220;Over the last few weeks, students and staff have continued to communicate concerns about the climate in Winthrop House to the college,&#8221; he wrote in an email to Winthrop House students and staff on Saturday. &#8220;The concerns expressed have been serious and numerous. The actions that have been taken to improve the climate have been ineffective, and the noticeable lack of faculty dean presence during critical moments has further deteriorated the climate in the house. I have concluded that the situation in the house is untenable.&#8221;
The controversy highlights a growing problem with current and recent college students: The belief that due process is an impediment to justice.
Because Weinstein was accused of sexually assaulting and harassing women, he doesn&#8217;t deserve representation, and any attorney who would represent him must be painted as problematic.
Harvard students should be taught that their feelings are misplaced and that they should have respect for the rule of law, the right to representation, and how to distinguish between an attorney doing their job and a faculty dean doing theirs.
Fifty-two current and former professors at Harvard Law School had <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/letters/2019/03/08/harvard-law-faculty-speak-support-resident-dean-representing-weinstein/okm55pW9aXOzbCkDXPDABN/story.html#comments">signed a letter</a> supporting Sullivan.
&#8220;We call upon our university&#8217;s administration to recognize that such legal advocacy in service of constitutional principles is not only fully consistent with Sullivan&#8217;s roles of law professor and dean of an undergraduate house, but also one of the many possible models that resident deans can provide in teaching, mentoring, and advising students,&#8221; the professors wrote.
The professors also wrote that they respect the students&#8217; right to protest &#8220;Sullivan&#8217;s choice of clients.&#8221;
&#8220;But we view any pressure by Harvard&#8217;s administration for him to resign as faculty dean of Winthrop, because of his representation or speaking on behalf of clients, as inconsistent with the university&#8217;s commitment to the freedom to defend ideas, however unpopular,&#8221; they concluded.
Colleges and universities continue to give in to the demands of student mobs, who will not be subjected even slightly to views and ideas they disagree with nor learn to cope with unpleasant things in the real world.

Harvard Caves, Drops Dean Hired As Harvey Weinstein’s Defense Attorney

Yesterday, Harvard University&#8217;s Faculty of Arts &amp; Sciences (FAS) <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com/e/fas-diversity-conference-a-decade-of-dialogue-tickets-59724027173#">hosted an event</a> entitled, &#8220;FAS Diversity Conference: A Decade of Dialogue.&#8221; The event <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com/e/fas-diversity-conference-a-decade-of-dialogue-tickets-59724027173#">description</a> highlighted that &#8220;anti-racism&#8221; activist Tim Wise would be the featured keynote speaker:
<blockquote>
Over the last ten years, the FAS Diversity Dialogue Series has sparked conversation about diversity, equality and inclusion in the FAS community and beyond. Join us for a retrospective look at diversity and inclusion, a discussion of current issues, and practical guidance on how we can move toward greater inclusion and belonging at Harvard.
We are pleased to announce that our keynote speaker will be Tim Wise, prominent anti-racism writer, educator, and activist. A moderated discussion with Tim will be led by Renee Graham, an associate editor and columnist at the Boston Globe.
</blockquote>
Hold aside for a second why Harvard would invite a white, reportedly heterosexual man to lead its ten-year commemoration conference on a diversity initiative. Because as conservative campus watchdog site The College Fix <a href="https://www.thecollegefix.com/keynote-speaker-at-harvard-diversity-conference-says-christians-should-be-locked-up">reports</a>, this &#8220;anti-racism&#8221; activist has a rather colorful online history of grotesquely bigoted statements against religious Jews and Christians. Most specifically, Wise has publicly called for those who actually believe in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament to be &#8220;locked up.&#8221;
Per <a href="https://www.thecollegefix.com/keynote-speaker-at-harvard-diversity-conference-says-christians-should-be-locked-up">The College Fix</a>:
<blockquote>
Tim Wise, an &#8220;anti-racism writer, educator and activist,&#8221; has denigrated Christians as &#8220;Jeezoids and fascists and called Pope Francis evil. He has tweeted that &#8220;people who believe in a God of hell/damnation deserve to be mocked viciously and run out of the public square.&#8221;
Those who base their morality on the Hebrew Scriptures &#8220;deserve to be locked up,&#8221; he said in 2015, claiming to be &#8220;sorta kidding but not by much.&#8221;
The Diversity Dialogue Series provides a &#8220;retrospective look at diversity and inclusion, a discussion of current issues, and practical guidance on how we can move toward greater inclusion and belonging at Harvard,&#8221; according to the event description.
</blockquote>
Here is the full underlying Facebook <a href="https://www.facebook.com/timjwise/posts/10152994403075670">post</a> from 2015, which features Wise commenting derogatorily about former U.S. congresswoman Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and which he set to a public viewership:
<blockquote>
This is America&#8230;people basing their beliefs on the fable of Noah and Ark, or their interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah&#8230;rather than science or logic&#8230;If you are basing your morality on a fairy tale written thousands of years ago, you deserve to be locked up&#8230;detained for your utter inability to deal with reality&#8230;NO, we are not obligated to indulge your irrationality in the name of your religious freedom&#8230;but we will provide you a very comfortable room, against which walls you may hurl yourself hourly if your choose. Knock yourself out&#8230;.seriously, knock yourself out, completely, for weeks at a time&#8230;I&#8217;m sorta kidding but not by much&#8230;I don&#8217;t believe lunatics like this should be locked up, but I do think they have to be politically destroyed, utterly rendered helpless to the cause of pluralism and democracy &#8230;the world is not theirs. They have no right to impose their bullshit on others. They can either change, or shut the hell up, or practice their special brand of crazy in their homes&#8230;or go away. Their choice. And this argument applies to any fundamentalist religionist of any faith who thinks they have a right to impose their beliefs on a secular, pluralistic society. Go away.
</blockquote>
In Wise&#8217;s extremely limited defense, The College Fix notes that the noted &#8220;anti-racism&#8221; activist avoided any bigoted anti-Jewish/anti-Christian language during his Harvard appearance yesterday.

A Harvard Conference Keynote Speaker Has Written That Religious Jews And Christians ‘Deserve To Be Locked Up’

Anti-Semitism

Bible

Christianity

Diversity

Judaism

The Undergraduate Council at Harvard College has shamefully <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/4/1/uc-funds-iaw/">voted</a> 21-13 to fund events for &#8220;Israel Apartheid Week&#8221; &#8212; a movement that has unfortunately <a href="https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/a-letter-to-a-student-who-encounters-the-israeli-apartheid-week/">gained substantial traction</a> across American academia in recent years. Furthermore, some of the invited guest speakers for Harvard&#8217;s &#8220;Israel Apartheid Week&#8221; have a history of calling for violence against Israeli Jews.
The Harvard Crimson <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/4/1/uc-funds-iaw/">reports</a>:
<blockquote>
The Undergraduate Council [UC] voted to allocate the Palestine Solidarity Committee [PSC] $2,050 to host Israeli Apartheid Week [IAW] at Sunday&#8217;s general meeting.
IAW is an international movement across college campuses&#8230; The PSC planned much of the programming of Harvard&#8217;s event, which began on March 30 and runs until April 4. The week includes Palestinian speakers, a student panel, an unveiling of a physical Wall of Resistance, and a movie screening.
The bill to fund IAW passed 21-13-4 and drew money from the UC&#8217;s Grant for an Open Harvard College, which subsidizes student initiatives that address one of the UC&#8217;s indicated &#8220;compelling interests.&#8221; The interests for the 2018-19 academic year are &#8220;mental health, race, culture, and faith relations, sexual assault and harassment prevention, social spaces, and financial accessibility.&#8221; &#8230;
Dozens of students who supported and opposed the Council&#8217;s funding of the event attended Sunday&#8217;s meeting. Students disagreed as to whether the event allowed for open dialogue among students with opposing views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
</blockquote>
Jewish and pro-Israel students at Harvard have, naturally, been fazed by the Undergraduate Council&#8217;s decision to fund a highly tendentious event that vilifies a liberal, Western-style American ally while glorifying an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/38814/watch-cnns-hill-appears-call-elimination-israel-ryan-saavedra">oftentimes genocidal</a> Palestinian-Arab national movement.
The Crimson continued, also noting that the infamous jihad-friendly founder of the facially anti-Semitic &#8220;Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions&#8221; (BDS) movement against Israel, <a href="https://canarymission.org/individual/Omar_Barghouti">Omar Barghouti</a>, would be invited to Harvard&#8217;s &#8220;Israel Apartheid Week&#8221;:
<blockquote>
Multiple Jewish students said the event makes them feel uncomfortable because some of the speakers invited to the week&#8217;s events have previously endorsed violence against Israeli civilians.
&#8220;One of the speakers that is slated to come, Omar Barghouti, has said that he supports the euthanasia of Zionism,&#8221; Gabriel Dardik &#8217;21 said. &#8220;Really, it makes me feel unsafe that this kind of person could come here.&#8221;
PSC supporters said Harvard Hillel has also brought speakers to campus who contributed to military operations against Palestinian civilians.
</blockquote>
As the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs has recently <a href="http://jcpa.org/is-the-barghouti-family-joining-forces-with-hamas/">noted</a>, though, Barghouti is not &#8220;merely&#8221; the leading BDS founder. He is also a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/44732/hammer-israel-must-destroy-hamas-once-and-all-josh-hammer">member of the same family as a same-named relative who has close ties</a> with the Sunni supremacist jihadist group Hamas, and key members of his family have been involved in high-profile skirmishes with Israeli security forces:
<blockquote>
On December 13, 2018, Israeli security forces killed and arrested terrorists who were involved in two terror attacks that horrified the Israeli public. In the Askar refugee camp near Nablus, they tracked down and killed Ashraf Naalwa, who murdered two Israelis in the Barkan industrial zone on October 7, 2018, and they shot Saleh Barghouti, responsible for the terror attack at the Ofra Junction on December 8, 2018, in the village of Surda near Ramallah. While Hamas was quick to announce Naalwa&#8217;s &#8220;martyrdom,&#8221; they did not claim him as coming from the ranks of the Hamas&#8217; Qassam Brigades. However, the terrorist killed in Ramallah, Saleh Barghouti, was a son of Omar Barghouti, a famous Hamas leader in the West Bank, so the Hamas fingerprints were very obvious in the Ofra attack.
</blockquote>
Alas, to paraphrase an old Dennis Prager axiom: American universities often have a surplus of knowledge, but all too often lack wisdom.

Awful: Harvard Student Government Funds ‘Israel Apartheid Week’

Israel

Harvard University is facing another racially charged lawsuit. Amid the ongoing repercussions of a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/11/02/660734399/harvard-discrimination-trial-is-ending-but-lawsuit-is-far-from-over">suit</a> alleging that Harvard discriminated against Asian-American students in its admission process, the esteemed university has been hit with another race-related suit, this one stretching back over a century. A woman who says she&#8217;s the ancestor of two slaves who were photographed for racist purposes by a Harvard University professor in 1850 has sued the university for &#8220;wrongful seizure, possession and monetization of the images,&#8221; <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/20/harvard-university-sued-descendants-slaves-over-photos-renty/3213537002/">USA Today</a> reported Wednesday.
The origin of the case is a Swiss-born professor at the university commissioning what may be the earliest daguerreotypes of American slaves. The dehumanizing images were used to promote a theory called <a href="http://www.history.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/History-of-the-Human-Sciences-2013-Keel-3-32.pdf">polygenism</a>, which claimed that different races did not share a common ancestor.
&#8220;Among the photographed: an African man named Renty and his daughter Delia,&#8221; USA Today explains. &#8220;They were stripped naked and photographed from several angles. Former professor Louis Agassiz, a biologist, had the photos taken to support an erroneous theory called polygenism that he and others used to argue African-Americans were inferior to white people.&#8221;
Tamara Lanier, who says she is the direct descendant of Renty and Delia, filed a lawsuit in Middlesex Superior Court Wednesday accusing Harvard of wrongfully obtaining and possessing the images. Lanier says the university has dismissed her requests to &#8220;stop licensing the pictures for the university&#8217;s profit&#8221; and continues to degrade her ancestors.
&#8220;In an interview with USA TODAY, Lanier said she&#8217;s. presented Harvard with information about her direct lineage to Renty since around 2011 but the school has repeatedly turned down her requests to review the research,&#8221; the outlet reports.
In response, Lanier hired Benjamin Crump, the lawyer who represented the families of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, as well as a Connecticut-based lawyer.
&#8220;This will force them to look at my information,&#8221; Lanier told USA Today. &#8220;It will also force them to publicly have the discussion about who Renty was and restoring him his dignity.&#8221;
Lanier is demanding the university give her the photos, which the school still legally owns, and is suing for an unspecified amount. The suit posits eight legal claims, citing &#8220;federal law over property rights, the Massachusetts law for the recovery of personal property and a separate state law about the unauthorized use of a name or picture for advertising purposes,&#8221; USA Today reports. It also alleges that Harvard is violating the spirit of the 13th Amendment by perpetuating the dehumanizing institution of slavery.
&#8220;For years, Papa Renty&#8217;s slave owners profited from his suffering &#8211; it&#8217;s time for Harvard to stop doing the same thing to our family,&#8221; she told the paper. The lawsuit echoes Lanier&#8217;s comment, alleging that Harvard has &#8220;enriched itself&#8221; from the racist images through licensing fees.
&#8220;Harvard&#8217;s refusal to honor our family&#8217;s history by acknowledging our lineage and its own shameful past is an insult to Papa Renty&#8217;s life and memory,&#8221; Lanier said.
Asked for comment, a Harvard spokesperson told USA Today that the university hadn&#8217;t been served yet thus could not present its position.
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/20/harvard-university-sued-descendants-slaves-over-photos-renty/3213537002/">Read the full report here</a>.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/35375/boston-globe-harvard-didnt-view-elizabeth-warren-james-barrett">Boston Globe: Harvard Didn&#8217;t View Elizabeth Warren As Native American; Here&#8217;s The Evidence</a>

Harvard Sued For Allegedly Profiting Off Photos Of Slaves

Slavery

A female Harvard University graduate student who had a MAGA hat and legally-owned guns in her room was asked by her apartment owner to move out after her roommates reportedly searched through her room and found the guns.
Leyla Pirnie had been living in her apartment with six roommates since September. She told <a href="https://freebeacon.com/issues/landlord-tells-harvard-student-move-legally-owned-guns/">The Washington Free Beacon</a>:
<blockquote>
A few weeks ago, I came back to my apartment from a weekend trip and was confronted by one of my roommates who asked if I had guns in the house. After being told far too many lies to count, my roommates finally admitted that they searched my closet, under my bed, and all of my drawers in pursuit of finding my guns.
When I asked them why they were in my room to begin with, they each came up with completely contradicting stories (none of which made any sense), but one comment struck me in particular: &#8220;We saw that you had a MAGA hat and come on, you&#8217;re from Alabama&#8230; so we just kind of assumed that you had something.&#8221; I asked why they didn&#8217;t just call me and ask me before intruding. One of the girls responded that fear took over her body and she felt compelled to search my room until she found proof&#8230; I cannot make this up.
</blockquote>
One of the roommates <a href="https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/0.jpg">emailed</a> Dave Lewis, president of Avid Management, arguing that Pirnie left her guns unlocked:
<blockquote>
As we understand it from speaking with Leyla, the firearms are all properly licensed and permitted, but are kept loaded and unlocked &#8230; We all discussed her right to keep legal firearms in a lawful manner, although we all discussed our discomfort about having firearms in the house which we in turn hope she respects. We discussed with Leyla that all of us are uncomfortable with having firearms in the house, and that their presence causes anxiety and deprives us of the quiet enjoyment of the premise to which we are entitled.
</blockquote>
Lewis responded with an <a href="https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/pic-5.jpg">email</a> in which he started by pointing out the local captain of the police department determined Pirnie had indeed kept her guns locked up, writing:
<blockquote>
I&#8217;ve consulted my attorney and have had several conversations today with Captain Donovan of the Somerville Police department, who at my request and Leyla&#8217;s invitation, this afternoon was allowed to inspect the premises and the storage of the firearms in question and have determined that they are being safely and legally stored under lock and key. In addition, the captain affirmed that Leyla is in compliance with state laws and has an interview scheduled with him on December 11 as part of her permit application to possess the firearms in her home.
</blockquote>
But Lewis then added:
<blockquote>
That being said, it&#8217;s clear that the rest of the housemates are extremely uncomfortable with the idea of firearms being kept in the household and this difference in philosophy and lifestyle has led to an uncomfortable level of tension and stress for the entire household. Consequently, since it&#8217;s clear that Leyla wants to keep her firearms, it would be best for all parties if she finds another place to live.
</blockquote>
Pirnie commented to the Beacon, &#8220;What I find uncomfortable is coming home to find out that six people I barely know went into my bedroom without permission and went through every single one of my drawers, without any regard to my privacy whatsoever. My landlord&#8217;s e-mail, though carefully crafted, showed tremendous prejudice against my right to legally have firearms.&#8221; She explained that she had told her roommates that one reason for her owning firearms was that she had been in a physically abusive relationship. She said, &#8220;Nobody has bothered to question, &#8216;Well, why do you want to have protection? Could it be because you&#8217;ve experienced something where you need to protect yourself as you see fit?&#8217; I have a real and legitimate reason as to why I want to protect myself.&#8221;
According to the Beacon, &#8220;When Pirnie and her father rejected Lewis&#8217;s request that she move out in the middle of studying for finals, Lewis responded by saying his request &#8216;was based strictly on practical and not idealogical (sic) terms.&#8217; He then warned that if the other roommates moved out Pirnie would have to pay their rent.&#8221;
Lewis emailed Pirnie and her father, &#8220;If the other roommates were to move out, Leyla would need to find roommates to share the place or foot the entire $6000+ monthly rent herself. Obviously it would be much easier for the others to stay and just fill one room (and I&#8217;m confident&#8212;were this to happen&#8212;that the remaining housemates will release Leyla from any further responsibility under the lease) and that&#8217;s why I proposed what I did.&#8221;
Pirnie concluded, &#8220;I&#8217;m still very much so being threatened out of my apartment. Either I leave and incur moving expenses or my roommates move and I incur their rent expenses&#8230; Doesn&#8217;t seem right. Not only is this a blatant violation of my privacy, but it&#8217;s also a violation of my rights.&#8221;

Female Harvard Student With MAGA Hat Finds Roommates Searched Her Room For Guns. Then This Happens.

Donald Trump

Guns

An organization that opposes racial preferences has filed lawsuits against the Harvard Law Review and the New York University Law Review over racial discrimination involving quotas.
Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposing Racial Preferences (FASORP) has filed Title VI and Title IX lawsuits against the two law reviews for discriminating against certain races in the name of diversity.
Gail Heriot, a University of San Diego law professor and member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, reports that each of these law reviews <a href="http://reason.com/volokh/2018/11/21/fasorp-pushing-back-against-identity-pol?utm_source=dlvr.it&amp;utm_medium=twitter">sets quotas that violate federal law</a>:
<blockquote>
The NYU Law Review sets quotas. Its web site declares that it &#8220;evaluates personal statements in light of various factors, including (but not limited to) race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, socio-economic background, ideological viewpoint, disability, and age.&#8221; It then goes on to state that &#8220;Exactly 12 students will be selected by the Diversity Committee&#8221; for membership.&#8221; Really? Exactly 12? (Emphasis original.)
The Harvard Law Review is only a bit subtler. It sets aside exactly 18 seats for &#8220;holistic review,&#8221; quickly adding the it is &#8220;strongly committed to a diverse and inclusive membership&#8221; and that &#8220;[a]pplicants who wish to make aspects of their identity available through the Law Review&#8216;s holistic consideration process will have the opportunity to indicate their racial or ethnic identity, physical disability status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status.&#8221;
</blockquote>
As Heriot notes, a 2003 Supreme Court decision (<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-241.ZO.html">Grutter v. Bollinger</a>) allowed colleges and universities to use racial preferences when considering applicants, but does not allow <a href="UC%20Regents%20v.%20Bakke%20(1978)">actual quotas</a> or giving &#8220;<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-516.ZS.html">points</a>&#8221; for certain races.
FASORP insists what the law reviews are doing violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
Title VI states that &#8220;No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.&#8221;
Title IX states that &#8220;No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.&#8221; This statute has been used to justified turning colleges and universities into pseudo-courts to adjudicate sexual assault.
It&#8217;s easy to see how Harvard and NYU violate these statutes. Harvard is already facing another lawsuit over their affirmative-action policies, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/at-trial-harvards-asian-problem-and-a-preference-for-white-students-from-sparse-country">which discriminate against Asian students</a>.
We still don&#8217;t know how the affirmative-action lawsuit will turn out for Harvard, but if the university loses, it could mean good news for FASORP&#8217;s lawsuit.

Harvard, NYU Law Reviews Sued Over Racial Quotas

Discrimination

New York University

Harvard students are supposed to be the smartest of the smart, but sometimes even they make a disastrous decision.
Devin Darrington, the Ivy League university&#8217;s star running back, caused a touchdown he had just scored to be called back on Saturday. Darrington darted through an open hole in the middle and dashed 27 yards for a touchdown during a game against Yale held at Boston&#8217;s Fenway Park, but as he sprinted toward the goal line, he reached around and flipped off the pursuing Yale defenders.
The referees were having none of that. The zebras flagged Darrington, charging him with unsportsmanlike conduct. Because Darrington had made the gesture before he entered the end zone, the TD was canceled and Harvard lost 15 yards from the spot of the foul. They were unable to get back into the end zone and had to settle for a field goal on the drive.
&#8220;An absolute lapse in judgment to say the least,&#8221; said the TV commentator.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Harvard RB Devin Darrington flips the bird 5 yards before crossing into the endzone.
Touchdown is reversed following unsportsmanlike conduct penalty <a href="https://t.co/1eAFT5l3Hd">pic.twitter.com/1eAFT5l3Hd</a>
&#8212; Sporting News (@sportingnews) <a href="https://twitter.com/sportingnews/status/1063894020462714880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
Harvard coach Tim Murphy ripped his young running back for the move. &#8220;The bottom line is: He was wrong,&#8221; Murphy said. &#8220;He was wrong. It&#8217;s that simple. It was the right call; he was wrong. I&#8217;m just so grateful to our team that he didn&#8217;t have to learn that the absolute hard way of trying to live with that for a year or however many years.&#8221;
But shortly after the game ended, Darrington took to Twitter to say he was wronged.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
It was my index finger but okay <a href="https://t.co/XAtn4akhjE">https://t.co/XAtn4akhjE</a>
&#8212; Devin (@d_dking34) <a href="https://twitter.com/d_dking34/status/1063906000980361216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
That claim sold some supporters.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I like how they made it super fuzzy and get away with saying it was THE FINGER. If you were to sue they would say we didn&#8217;t specify which finger. Sad! Good game Devin! <a href="https://t.co/I6fUf7ovZe">pic.twitter.com/I6fUf7ovZe</a>
&#8212; Greg Smith (@JtowneSmitty) <a href="https://twitter.com/JtowneSmitty/status/1063928941428293632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Even in the blurred picture you can tell it&#8217;s not the middle finger&#8230;I love media dramatization so very much <a href="https://t.co/skRnitxrxC">pic.twitter.com/skRnitxrxC</a>
&#8212; Julia Burkhardt (@Julesssss11) <a href="https://twitter.com/Julesssss11/status/1063993109258911744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
Others weren&#8217;t buying it.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
It absolutely was not your index finger.
&#8212; Austin Futch (@juiceboy72) <a href="https://twitter.com/juiceboy72/status/1063940426267279360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>
And one Twitterer said maybe Darrington should just play the game.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Why put a finger up at all though? Out there costing your team.
&#8212; Drew (@DB_Cooper21) <a href="https://twitter.com/DB_Cooper21/status/1063972397869617159?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div>

Menu