Harvard pays the price for pro-Hamas protests, anti-Semitism on campus with 15% donation drop



On Thursday, Harvard University released its fiscal year 2024 financial report, which revealed a nearly 15% decline in donations compared to the previous year, marking the most significant drop in a decade.

According to the report, the Ivy League school received $1.38 billion in donations in 2023, which plunged to $1.17 billion in 2024.

'Launched efforts to understand where and how we can improve.'

Despite the decline, Harvard did not lose its spot as the wealthiest university in the world. In fiscal year 2024, the Ivy League school generated a 9.6% return on its endowment fund, valued at $53.2 billion.

The significant donation dip can be attributed to several of Harvard’s top donors vowing to halt their funding over the university’s poor handling of the pro-Hamas campus protests.

In January, Kenneth Griffin, the founder and CEO of Citadel LLC, a hedge fund, called Harvard students “whiny snowflakes” and said he would no longer donate to the institution.

“I’d like that to change, and I have made that clear to members of the corporate board,” Griffin stated. “But until Harvard makes it very clear that they’re going to resume their role as educating young American men and women to be leaders, to be problem solvers, to take on difficult issues, I’m not interested in supporting the institution.”

He accused Harvard and other elite universities of “being lost in the wilderness of microaggressions, a DEI agenda that seems to have no real endgame.”

Griffin previously donated over $500 million to Harvard.

Bill Ackman, founder and CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, a hedge fund firm, also declared he would no longer donate to his alma mater.

“I came to learn that the root cause of antisemitism at Harvard was an ideology that had been promulgated on campus, an oppressor/oppressed framework, that provided the intellectual bulwark behind the protests, helping to generate anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hate speech and harassment,” Ackman wrote in a lengthy X post.

Leonard V. Blavatnik, a billionaire philanthropist, stopped donating after previously providing Harvard Medical School with $200 million, the single largest donation to the school.

Former Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned in January following a massive plagiarism scandal amid already mounting criticism for her failed handling of the pro-Hamas protests.

Harvard’s new president, Alan Garber, wrote a message in the Ivy League school’s latest financial report, stating that the institution has “launched efforts to understand where and how we can improve.”

“Our task forces to combat antisemitism and anti-Israel bias, and anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, anti-Palestinian bias are focused on rebuilding not only a sense of belonging but also genuine acceptance among members of our community,” Garber wrote.

He noted that two of the school’s working groups “have outlined paths to more meaningful communication and constructive disagreement.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

House Committee Accuses Elite University Of ‘Willfully Obstructing’ Investigation Into Assault On Jewish Student

'Does not take antisemitism seriously'

Harvard social 'scientists' lay out the case for the existence of 'cryptoterrestrials' such as lizard people



The Department of Defense's All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office defines "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena" (UAP) as:

(A) airborne objects that are not immediately identifiable; (B) transmedium objects or devices; (C) and submerged objects or devices that are not immediately identifiable and that display behavior or performance characteristics suggesting that the objects or devices may be related to the objects or devices described in subparagraph (A) or (B).

The Pentagon regards UAP as "sources of anomalous detections in one or more domain ... that are not yet attributable to known actors and that demonstrate behaviors that are not readily understood by sensors or observers."

The dominant hypotheses for these phenomena are either that they are the work of extraterrestrials from distant worlds and civilizations, or that they were simply fashioned by human beings.

A paper set to be published in the academic journal Philosophy and Cosmology recommends that scientists keep an open mind about a possible third option: that UAP could be the product of nonhuman intelligent beings (NHI) "concealed in stealth here on Earth (e.g., underground), and/or its near environs (e.g., the moon), and/or even 'walking among us' (e.g., passing as humans)."

In other words, academics are entertaining the possibility that flying saucers might not be the work of little green men from Mars but rather by "cryptoterrestrials": lizard people, stranded aliens, fairies, advanced cave dwellers, or residents of the dark side of the moon.

According to Tim Lomas and Brendan Case of Harvard University's Human Flourishing Program, and biological anthropologist Michael Masters of Montana Technological University, scientists should not dismiss the "cryptoterrestrial" hypothesis (CTH) outright.

"We recognize these CTHs may rightly be regarded skeptically by most scientists, but argue they nevertheless should not be ruled out, and deserve consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness," they wrote.

The trio indicated they were inclined to pursue the topic after philosopher Bernado Kastrup's recent dismissal of the hypothesis over its "outlandish, unlikely, and 'far out' nature."

Their paper — a hodgepodge of references to local myths, alleged archeological discoveries, believers' anecdotes, questions raised by lawmakers, science fiction, and statements by military officials — raised five considerations: limits to historical and geological knowledge; traces of lost civilizations; supposed traces of underground civilizations; traditions around "magical" cryptoterrestrials; and UAP activity underground, underwater, and near the moon.

'We personally would have rated the possibility of a CTH having some basis in truth as low as 1%.'

The researchers stressed at the outset that this particular theory is distinct from the notion that UAP are the work of inter-dimensional beings. Instead, so-called cryptoterrestrials are understood to be physically present within current standard spacetime dimensions, even if "hidden" from view.

Possible candidates for cryptoterrestrials apparently include "dinosauroids."

"Across cultures are legends for instance of anthropomorphic reptilian races, such as the Nagas, a semi-divine species of half-human, half-serpent beings thought to reside in Patala (a netherworld), venerated in Hinduism and Buddhism. Moreover, palaeontologists have even speculated whether such creatures could possibly have evolved from known zoological origins," wrote the Harvard academics.

The researchers cited the suggestion that an anthropomorphic dinosaur called a troodon survived the mass extinction event 65 million years ago and now lurks underground. The troodon or some other "terrestrial animal which evolved to live in stealth," they intimated, could be that which former CIA agent John Ramirez apparently believes is "crawling all over the earth" with the knowledge of the U.S. government, the National Reconnaissance Office in particular.

Noting the perception of an absence of visible means of propulsion or sources of exhaust in various alleged sightings, the researchers raised the possibility, again noncommittally, that cryptoterrestrials could instead be magical beings, such as angels or "fairies, elves, gnomes, brownies, trolls, and the like."

If not lizard people or fairy folk, then there are two other possibilities, according to the paper: remnants of lost human civilizations or "extraterrestrial aliens or our intertemporal descendants who 'arrived' on Earth from elsewhere in the cosmos or from the human future, respectively, and concealed themselves in stealth."

The paper — released online one year after Gallup revealed that Americans' confidence in high education had fallen to 36% — notes that the primary locales where NHI have been alleged to hide out are Antarctica; Dulce, New Mexico; deep in the oceans; and on the dark side of the moon. Volcanoes, such as the Popocatepetl volcano in central Mexico, are also apparently possible headquarters if not portals.

The researchers admitted in their conclusion that all four hypotheses "are far-fetched on their face; we entertain them here because some aspects of UAP are strange enough that they call for unconventional explanations."

The trio noted that whereas in past years, "We personally would have rated the possibility of a CTH having some basis in truth as low as 1%," they would now put it at around 10%.

"Indeed, this is a fitting summary of the CTH: it may be exceedingly improbable, but hopefully this paper has shown it should nevertheless be kept on the table as we seek to understand the ongoing empirical mystery of UAP," continued the researchers. "This point was made in a recent article in Scientific American, for example, titled 'It’s time to hear from social scientists about UFOs.'"

Although accepted for publication, the paper has not yet been peer-reviewed.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Harvard student cries 'witch hunt' after another black female former professor accused of academic dishonesty



A student writer for the Harvard Crimson has called for a university-wide review of all faculty publications after investigative journalists uncovered more examples of alleged academic dishonesty at the hands of a black female former Harvard professor.

On Wednesday, Christopher Rufo of City Journal and Luke Rosiak of the Daily Wire revealed that Lisa D. Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and a tenured professor at Michigan State University, has allegedly been even more untruthful about her academic work than previously thought.

Cook's economic credentials have been called into question at least since President Joe Biden nominated her to the Federal Reserve board in January 2022. Back then, critics noted not only that her list of publications was unusually thin for a tenured professor but that her most celebrated article — "Violence and Economic Activity: Evidence from African American Patents, 1870 to 1940," published in 2014 — was predicated on egregiously flawed data, leading her to unfairly argue that lynching and discrimination caused the number of patents issued to black people to collapse around the turn of the 20th century.

One attempt at replicating her research for that article indicated that the number of patents issued to blacks at that time could have been nearly 70 times higher than the number Cook offered.

She also continues to mislead about the quality of at least one her publications. In 2022, Chris Brunet of the Daily Caller News Foundation noticed that Cook had claimed she had been published in the American Economic Review, described by Brunet as "the top peer-reviewed economics journal in the world." However, that 2009 article actually appeared in American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, which is not peer-reviewed. Though this detail has been publicly documented for more than two years, the CV included on Cook's personal academic website — which is also linked to her directory listing at the MSU Department of Economics — still implies the article appeared in the more prestigious version of AER.

Now, Rufo and Rosiak have reported that Cook has also repeatedly copied lengthy passages from the work of other scholars without proper attribution and even committed "self-plagiarism," lifting excerpts from her previous articles and including them in new ones, thereby compromising the notion of original work. In the journalists' opinion, Cook's publication missteps demonstrate "a pattern of careless scholarship at best or, at worst, academic misconduct."

Cook, who was also once a member of the faculty of the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government and the deputy director of Africa research at its Center for International Development, is now the fifth current or former Harvard professor who also happens to be black and female to be accused of some form of academic malfeasance. The others include former Harvard President Claudine Gay, current chief diversity and inclusion officer Sherri Charleston, current Extension School administrator Shirley Greene, and current assistant sociology Professor Christina Cross.

"Let’s not ignore the pattern," Rufo tweeted a few weeks ago.

Maya Bodnick of the Harvard Crimson believes this "pattern" is actually the result of a conservative "witch hunt" to try and show that female black scholars plagiarize at disproportionally high rates. "But plagiarism has nothing to do with race, gender, or identity — rather, it’s a broad problem in academia," Brodnick argued.

To show that members of both genders and all racial groups commit plagiarism at roughly the same rates, Bodnick called for "a broad plagiarism review of the entire faculty" at Harvard. Though others suggested such a project would take years of work to complete and therefore cost a considerable amount of money, Bodnick insisted the review would be "worth the resources."

"We can’t let outsiders control the plagiarism narrative," she claimed. "Harvard and other universities must stay ahead of the game, surfacing instances of plagiarism and addressing them before malicious actors can hurt the University’s credibility."

Cook did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Senior left-leaning Harvard law professor denounces 'DEI regime' and 'ideological litmus tests'



Randall L. Kennedy, 69, is the Michael R. Klein Professor of Law at Harvard University, where he has taught courses on criminal law and the regulation of race relations for four decades. Although the black South Carolinian describes himself as a "scholar on the left committed to struggles for social justice," even he can no longer stomach his university's "DEI regime."

Kennedy penned an opinion piece Tuesday for the Harvard Crimson, stressing that compulsory DEI statements pose "a profound challenge to academic freedom" and ought to be scrapped.

The senior academic observed in the article, which was part of the school's Council on Academic Freedom's bi-weekly column in the Harvard Crimson, that among the documents required of applicants interested in an assistant professor position at the Harvard Graduate School of Education was a "statement of teaching philosophy that includes a description of their 'orientation toward diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.'"

Kennedy noted that such requirements are not exceptional but rather increasingly the rule at Harvard and other once-respected academic institutions. Additionally, he suggested that this matter of signaling ideological compliance is no longer a passive affair but rather an engaged process by which applicants "profess — and flaunt — faith in DEI."

According to the leftist professor, Harvard's Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning's "how-to page [on crafting a DEI statement] mirrors the expectation that DEI statements will essentially constitute pledges of allegiance that enlist academics into the DEI movement by dint of soft-spoken or real coercion: If you want the job or the promotion, play ball — or else."

Kennedy was referencing a document released by the Bok Center entitled, "Composing Your Diversity Statement." The document appears to suggest that the kind of research and instruction that would qualify applicants as believers is that which would help advance the radical identitarian agenda animating the DEI movement.

For instance, it asks the following questions:

  • "Does your research examine historical or contemporary issues of social inequality?"
  • "Does your research enhance our understanding of power and privilege and their impact on marginalized communities?"
  • "Does your research foreground the experiences and issues of marginalized communities, whose lives have been invisibilized because of research methods that privilege dominant social groups?"
  • "Do you acknowledge racial trauma and the impact of white supremacy and anti-Blackness on the culture of higher education in your courses?"
  • "Do your readings, course materials, and guest speakers feature people who are diverse in terms of race, gender, sexual identity, nationality, and ability?"

The document also lists various DEI priorities such as "changing the historical legacies, belief systems, and institutional practices that unequally structure social relations in the academy" and prompts applicants to build their own profession of DEI "faith" using elements of the movement's broader creed.

"Playing ball entails affirming that the DEI bureaucracy is a good thing and asking no questions that challenge it, all the while making sure to use in one's attestations the easy-to-parody DEI lingo," wrote Kennedy.

When speaking to podcaster Lex Fridman in May 2023, Kennedy made a similar case, noting that those asked to write a DEI statement are being asked "to say 'I'm down with the diversity, equity, and inclusion ethos, program, policy, campaign. And here's what I've done that shows that I'm down with this program and therefore I'm okay."

\u201cWhat you're being asked to do is to say, \u2018I\u2019m down with the diversity, equity, and inclusion ethos, program, policy, campaign \u2014 and here\u2019s what I\u2019ve done that shows that I\u2019m down with this program, and, therefore, I\u2019m OK.\u2019\u201d\n\nRandall Kennedy on DEI statements:\n\n@lexfridman
— (@)

The professor further indicated Tuesday that DEI statements and the corresponding regime serve to maximize "leftist conformity" on campus.

"It does not take much discernment to see, moreover, that the diversity statement regime leans heavily and tendentiously towards varieties of academic leftism and implicitly discourages candidates who harbor ideologically conservative dispositions," added the professor.

Extra to killing academic freedom and perspective on campus, Kennedy suggested the "DEI regime" abets cynicism, both about the motivations behind diversity statements and also about the "cottage industry of diversity statement 'counseling' that has popped up to support the initiative."

Kennedy stressed that there ought to be no ideological commitments asked of prospective hires, intimating that his leftist peers and underlings would alternatively "howl" were Harvard to ask "a candidate for a faculty position to submit a statement of their orientation towards capitalism, or patriotism, or Making America Great Again with a clear expectation of allegiance."

"By overreaching, by resorting to compulsion, by forcing people to toe a political line, by imposing ideological litmus tests, by incentivizing insincerity, and by creating a circular mode of discourse that is seemingly impervious to self-questioning, the current DEI regime is discrediting itself," Kennedy concluded.

The Harvard Crimson also ran an article Tuesday by Edward J. Hall, the Norman E. Vuilleumier Professor of Philosophy, which suggested DEI statements are worthwhile and Kennedy's ire is misplaced.

"Furor over diversity statements in hiring is a red herring," wrote Hall. "I share my colleague professor Randall L.Kennedy’s anger. But I think we should direct that anger at its proper target: not diversity statements themselves, but rather the horribly distorted view that has taken hold about what they should contain."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Leftist academics circle the wagons after another Harvard race obsessive is called out for plagiarism



Another race obsessive on the faculty at Harvard University was outed as a likely plagiarist last week.

Rather than acknowledge that assistant sociology professor Christina Cross may have wrongfully passed off the work of others as her own or that Harvard might be intellectually bankrupt, Cross' colleagues have cried racism and circled the wagons.

Quick background

Cross, an assistant professor of sociology and a faculty affiliate of the Department of African and African American Studies at Harvard University, is the latest race obsessive at Harvard University exposed as a potential plagiarist.

Claudine Gay resigned her post in disgrace on Jan. 2 after nearly 50 plagiarism complaints were filed against her, implicating nearly half of her published works along with her doctoral thesis.

Later that same month, affirmative action expert Sherri Ann Charleston, the university's chief DEI officer, was slapped with a complaint identifying 40 examples of alleged plagiarism in two of her academic works.

In February, Harvard Extension School administrator Shirley R. Greene was accused of 42 instances of plagiarism in her 2008 University of Michigan dissertation.

Blaze News previously reported that a complaint was filed this month with Harvard's office of research integrity against Cross, claiming her work contains multiple instances of plagiarism, including "verbatim plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, uncited paraphrasing, and uncited quotations from other sources."

Manhattan Institute fellow Christopher Rufo detailed the complaint for City Journal, noting Cross has been accused of appropriating "an entire paragraph nearly verbatim from a paper by Stacey Bosick and Paula Fomby — the latter of whom was her dissertation adviser — without citing the source or placing verbatim language in quotations" in her 2019 dissertation.

Cross also allegedly plagiarized another full paragraph from Bosick and Fomby elsewhere in the paper as well as the ideas of others without attribution.

'Professors for plagiarism!'

Fomby, who served on Cross' dissertation committee, along with dozens of sociologists from various academic institutions, released a statement Thursday, expressing deep concern "about this false allegation of research miscondudct [sic]."

"It's not simply that Dr. Cross's writings do not constitute plagiarism," continued the statement. "Rather, her description of a large public dataset in this standardized way is simply good research practice - helping to ensure replicability and transparency."

The Manhattan Institute fellow replied, "Professors for plagiarism!"

@pamela_herd Professors for plagiarism!
— (@)

On Monday, Harvard's Department of Sociology similarly released a statement defending Cross.

"We are deeply disturbed by the false allegations of plagiarism made against our colleague Christina Cross. The allegations are absurd," said the statement. "The claim that may sound most serious involves a description of a widely used dataset, in which Dr. Cross describes its features in the terms used by the people who assembled it – in the most accurate terms possible."

The sociology department suggested further that Cross' race may have been a motivating factor behind the complaint.

"We find these bogus claims to be particularly troubling in the context of a series of attacks on Black women in academia with the clear subtext that they have no place in our universities," continued the statement. "We are fortunate to have [Cross] on our faculty, and she has our full and unalloyed support."

The department appears to have embraced the desperate line of defense appealed to on exit by Claudine Gay and by other leftists since, namely that the effort to combat plagiarism is "fueled by racial animus."

Blaze News previously noted that Heba Gowayed, a leftist associate professor of sociology at CUNY Hunter College, similarly suggested that Cross' scholarship had been reviewed "solely because she's Black."

Gowayed added, "It's KKK level s**t."

Georgetown University professor Don Moynihan claimed that the scrutinies of Cross and other academics by Rufo and others "are examples of backlash, of a post George Floyd Politics."

Marcy Carlson, a sociology professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, defended Cross and amplified Moynihan's attempt at narrative curation, writing, "Describing a well-known national public data set in similar words to another paper is not plagiarism!"

Rufo responded, "They are openly defending the violation of their own written policies."

University of Wisconsin professor argues that lifting entire passages verbatim from another paper \u201cis not plagiarism.\u201d They are openly defending the violation of their own written policies.
— (@)

The Journal of Marriage and Family, an academic journal published by the National Council of Family Relations, also leaned into the racial framing of the plagiarism complaint against Cross, tweeting, "We condemn the contemptible attacks aimed at undermining and threatening scholars focused on race and racism, in particular Black women academics. We support and stand with our valued colleague Dr. Cross."

Cross happens to be a member of the journal's editorial board.

Rufo was ready with another pointed response: "Academic journal openly defends plagiarism, arguing that exposing academic misconduct by 'Black women' is equivalent to 'threatening scholars focused on race.' They have replaced integrity with intersectionality. The standards are gone."

Rufo also refuted the racism suggestion, tweeting, "For the record, I have asked my source to also search the academic work of white scholars in grievance departments at Harvard and, thus far, they have not turned up plagiarism."

"This is not a large-scale study, but it's certainly plausible that lower academic standards for 'diversity and inclusion' hires could be correlated with a disparity in plagiarism and other forms of academic incompetence. This is, in one way, definitional to DEI hiring," added Rufo.

While the DEI critic went scorched-earth on those so-called scholars bending over backward to defend possible plagiarism, Cross thanked them.

Cross tweeted Monday, "Thank you, Dear Ones, for your relentless support. Moments like this show you how deeply loved and cared for you are...I'm going to keep doing what I do & do the best work I can do for the families whose stories, all too often, go untold."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Leftist professor 'shaking with rage' because her race-obsessive peer at Harvard was outed as possible plagiarist



Yet another race obsessive on faculty at Harvard University has been exposed for alleged plagiarism. While scholars might take satisfaction that grifters are being outed, this latest revelation concerning assistant sociology professor Christina Cross has left one leftist professor "actually shaking with rage."

Quick background

Harvard University has been rocked in recent months by plagiarism scandals.

Claudine Gay resigned her post as Harvard's 30th president on Jan. 2 after nearly 50 complaints had been filed against her, implicating seven of her 17 published works, including her 1997 doctoral thesis. Despite disgracing the institution, Gay was able to remain on faculty.

Later that month, affirmative action expert Sherri Ann Charleston, the university's chief diversity and inclusion officer, was slapped with a complaint identifying 40 examples of alleged plagiarism in two of her academic works, including her 2009 dissertation.

A complaint submitted to the chair of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences' professional conduct committee in February accused Harvard Extension School administrator Shirley R. Greene of 42 instances of plagiarism — just in her 2008 University of Michigan dissertation.

Critically plagiarized race studies

The latest Harvard plagiarism scandal concerns Christina Cross, an assistant professor of sociology and a faculty affiliate of the Department of African and African American Studies at Harvard University. Cross — like Greene, a University of Michigan graduate — is apparently an up-and-comer in the field of critical race studies.

In addition to having an impactful article attributed to her in the New York Times, which downplayed the importance of the two-parent family, Cross has enjoyed support from the National Science Foundation.

Manhattan Institute fellow Christopher Rufo reported Tuesday that a new complaint has been filed with Harvard's office of research integrity, this time against Cross, claiming her work suffers multiple instances of plagiarism, including "verbatim plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, uncited paraphrasing, and uncited quotations from other sources."

Rufo indicated Cross did not respond to his request for comment.

According to Rufo, Cross is accused of lifting "an entire paragraph nearly verbatim from a paper by Stacey Bosick and Paula Fomby — the latter of whom was her dissertation advisor — without citing the source or placing verbatim language in quotations" in her 2019 dissertation.

The most serious allegation in the complaint is that Cross lifted an entire paragraph nearly verbatim from a paper by Stacey Bosick and Paula Fomby\u2014the latter of whom was her dissertation advisor\u2014without citing the source or placing verbatim language in quotations.
— (@)

In addition to apparently appropriating this entire paragraph without attribution, Cross allegedly plagiarized another full paragraph from Bosick and Fomby later in the paper, making only slight alterations. The complaint indicates that again, Cross failed to place the copied content in quotation marks or properly cite the actual authors.

Elsewhere in the dissertation and another paper, Cross allegedly lifts work from a number of sources, with minor word substitutions, without placing the copied language in quotation marks or properly citing the authors.
— (@)

Rufo stressed that "Cross cannot plead unfamiliarity with the source: Fomby served on Cross's dissertation committee, making the offense even more egregious."

Throughout the paper, the prospective CRT star ostensibly passed off others' ideas and language as her own. In one instance, she allegedly lifted a passage from a paper coauthored by another academic who served on her dissertation committee, again without using direct quotations.

When allegedly adopting real scholars' language as her own, it appears Cross, who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants, did not even bother to change their unique use of parenthetical notes or italics.

Rufo noted that Cross' apparent trouble expressing herself without adopting the language of others is not limited to her dissertation. The complaint suggests that Cross also plagiarized in a 2018 paper published in the journal Population Studies.

The Manhattan Institute fellow highlighted that Cross' alleged improprieties constitute plagiarism according to Harvard's own definition. The "Harvard Guide to Using Sources" states that "it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper."

According the university's latest student handbook, "Students who, for whatever reason, submit work either not their own or without clear attribution to its sources will be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including requirement to withdraw from the College."

The fact that Gay, Greene, and Charleston have not been ousted bodes well for Cross, as it appears faculty and staff are not held to the same standard as students.

Literally shaking

Heba Gowayed, an associate professor of sociology at CUNY Hunter College, was devastated to hear about her peer's possible bout of plagiarism — not that Cross had allegedly engaged in it but that she had been caught.

Gowayed, a race-obsessive critic of Israel who has advocated for abolishing border policing and the U.S. citizenship exam, tweeted Thursday, "So today I sat down to work, to write a talk. I then got a text from a friend that a colleague is being attacked purely & solely because she's Black by the same assholes who attacked Claudine Gay. And now it's an hour and a half later. These months have seen so much stolen time."

While evidently more concerned about stolen time than stolen ideas, Gowayed exhausted more time persevering on Cross' forthcoming fall from grace.

"I am actually shaking with rage," continued Gowayed. "I cannot stop obsessing over it. It's KKK level s**t. And I don't know what to do about it. I've never been more worried about what the near future has in store."

@victorerikray I am actually shaking with rage. I cannot stop obsessing over it. It's KKK level shit. And I don't know what to do about it. I've never been more worried about what the near future has in store.
— (@)

Gowayed was not the only academic left trembling by Cross' outing as a likely plagiarist.

Karen Benjamin Guzzo, professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, wrote, "I'm just absolutely livid about this."

@kbguzzo @hebagowayed @victorerikray @donmoyn The name's Karen, huh?
— (@)

Guzzo added, "What a nightmare for her to have to go through."

Gowayed and Guzzo were both apparently fired up by Georgetown University professor Don Moynihan's Substack article alleging that exposés such as Rufo's "are examples of backlash, of a post George Floyd Politics" aimed at feeding "a culture of fear within research institutions."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

DEI-Obsessed Universities Overprice Degrees And Under-Deliver On Them

Spending on DEI has taken away valuable resources that could have been committed to supporting more students and improving education outcomes.
Billionaire Legend Reveals His Red Pill Wake Up Call

Billionaire Legend Reveals His Red Pill Wake Up Call

GOP-Led Committee Announces Subpoenas Against Harvard In Antisemitism Probe

'I am extremely disappointed in the path that Harvard has chosen to take'