University Disentanglement
         Toward a Theory o ---  University Governance
                                    Seth C. Oranburg1

Abstract As universities — ace mounting pressure to divest — rom controversial industries and navigate evolving legal standards, their lack o — a coherent governance — ramework exposes them to signi — icant risks that corporations, with established governance theories, can better mitigate. This Article argues that universities’ distinctive and under-theorized nature as business entities leads to legal and ethical ambiguities, particularly in “university disentanglement”—the process o — deciding whether to sever — inancial or operational ties with entities or ideas con — licting with institutional values. Without a structured approach to such critical decision-making, universities are le — t vulnerable to heightened business risks, elevated agency costs, and substantial legal liabilities.

To address this challenge, the Article proposes a business law

ramework — or university governance — ocused on — our key imperatives: (1) developing a theoretical model (the ethical governance matrix) that addresses universities’ unique business characteristics, (2) adapting — iduciary duties to balance mission-driven goals with — inancial realities, (3) standardizing ethical practices to mitigate legal and reputational risks, and (4) reducing agency and transaction costs associated with decentralized decision-making. By o —

ering legal and historical analysis—including detailed analysis and application o — the matrix to eight case studies—the Article shows how adopting this — ramework can trans — orm university governance, enabling institutions to align their decision-making with their social mission and expand their economic in — luence through innovative strategies like crowd — unding.

By integrating universities into the broader legal scholarship on business entities, this Article — ills a critical gap in business law theory. It provides a structured approach to help universities meet the dual demands o — social responsibility and — inancial stability, o —

ering

1 Pro — essor o — Law, University o — New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School o — Law; Director, Program on Organizations, Business, and Markets at NYU’s Classical Liberal Institute. I extend my sincere thanks to Zachary M. Leininger (JD expected 2026) and Joe Mohler (JD expected 2025) — or their invaluable assistance with cite-checking and research support. Their meticulous work has greatly contributed to the development o — this Article. Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

a roadmap

or legal re — orms that can better accommodate the complex nature o — non- corporate governance.

Keywords University Governance; Disentanglement; Divestment; Ethical Decision-Making; Utilitarianism; Deontological Ethics; Virtue Ethics; Rawlsian Justice; Social Responsibility; Higher Education; Moral Philosophy; Financial Ethics; Institutional Autonomy; Corporate Governance; Sustainability; Human Rights; Climate Change; Ethical Investments; Public Trust; Academic Leadership

JEL Codes K22; K32; L31; M14; Q56; A22; I23.

                                       2 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Keywords……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 JEL Codes …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 I. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 II. The Matrix o — University Disentanglement as Analytical Framework ……………………. 12 A. Why Traditional Governance Models Fall Short …………………………………………… 12 B. How the Matrix Solves the Governance Puzzle……………………………………………. 13 C. The Matrix as an Innovative Organizational Governance Tool …………………………. 13 D. Lexicon …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14 E. The Matrix o — University Disentanglement …………………………………………………. 15 F. Why the Matrix Is Necessary ………………………………………………………………….. 15 G. The Two Axes o — the Matrix …………………………………………………………………….. 15

1. Boycott vs. Divestiture ………………………………………………………………………. 16
2. Perspectives vs. Identities ………………………………………………………………….. 16 H. Four Quadrants o — University Disentanglement ………………………………………….. 17
3. Boycott Based on Perspectives: Ideological Rejection ………………………………. 17
4. Boycott Based on Identities: Identity Exclusion ……………………………………….. 17
5. Divestiture Based on Perspectives: “Principled disengagement” …………………. 17
6. Divestiture Based on Identities: “Identity-Alignment Withdrawal” ……………….. 18 I. Integrating Business Law Principles with Ethical and Moral Imperatives …………… 18 J. Overview o — the University Disentanglement Framework ………………………………. 19 III. Eight Historical Examples o — University Disentanglement ……………………………… 20 A. Vietnam War Protests – Ideological Rejection…………………………………………….. 20

7. Nature o

   the Protests ……………………………………………………………………….. 21

8. Application o

   the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 21

9. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 22
10. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 22

11. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 23 B. Anti-Jewish Quotas – Identity Exclusion ……………………………………………………. 23

                                             3 o ---  115
    

    Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

12. Nature o

    the Boycott ………………………………………………………………………… 23

13. Application o

    the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 24

14. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 24
15. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 24
16. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 25 C. LGBTQ Faculty and Students Boycott – Identity Exclusion …………………………….. 25

17. Nature o

    the Boycott ………………………………………………………………………… 25

18. Application o

    the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 26

19. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 26
20. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 27
21. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 27 D. South A — rica Apartheid Divestment – Principled Disengagement …………………….. 27

22. The Nature o

    the Campaign ……………………………………………………………….. 28

23. Application o

    the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 28

24. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 29
25. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 29
26. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 30 E. Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement – Principled Disengagement ……………………… 30

27. Nature o

    the Campaign …………………………………………………………………….. 30

28. Application o

    the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 31

29. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 31
30. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 32
31. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 32 F. Boycott, Divest, Sanction Movement – Identity-Alignment Withdrawal …………….. 33

32. The Nature o

    the Campaign ……………………………………………………………….. 33

33. Application o

    the Matrix ……………………………………………………………………. 34

34. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 34
35. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 35

36. Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………. 35

                                             4 o ---  115
    

    Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

G. McCarthy Era Purges (1950s): From Ideological Rejection to Identity-Based Exclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 36

1. The Descent into Identity-Based Purge ………………………………………………….. 36

2. Application o

   the Matrix: Perspective vs. Identity …………………………………….. 37

3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations………………………………………………………….. 38
4. Impact on Universities ………………………………………………………………………. 38

5. Conclusion: Setting the Stage

   or Modern Analysis …………………………………… 38 H. Summary o — Historical Examples…………………………………………………………….. 39 IV. Contemporary University Reactions to Disentanglement Demands ………………… 40 A. The Spark: October 7, 2023 ……………………………………………………………………. 42 B. The Powder: University Responses to October 7 …………………………………………. 44

6. Harvard University ……………………………………………………………………………. 45

7. University o

   Pennsylvania ………………………………………………………………….. 49

8. University o

   Chicago ………………………………………………………………………… 53

9. Columbia University …………………………………………………………………………. 56
10. UCLA …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 61
11. Cornell University …………………………………………………………………………….. 64
12. MIT ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67

13. Stan

    ord University …………………………………………………………………………… 71

14. Princeton University………………………………………………………………………….. 75
15. NYU …………………………………………………………………………………………… 78
16. Georgetown University …………………………………………………………………… 82

17. University o

    New Hampshire …………………………………………………………… 86 C. Summary o — Key Findings — rom Case Study ……………………………………………….. 89 D. Consistency as a Key Determinant ………………………………………………………….. 91 E. The Challenges o — Utilitarianism ……………………………………………………………… 92 F. Mixed Approaches Yield Mixed Results …………………………………………………….. 92 G. Normative Implications — or University Governance ……………………………………… 92 V. Normative Foundations o — University Disentanglement …………………………………… 93 A. Introduction to Normative Theories in Disentanglement ……………………………….. 93 5 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

B. Utilitarianism and Consequentialism ………………………………………………………. 93 C. Deontological Ethics and Duty-Bound Decisions ………………………………………… 95

1. Duty vs. Consequence in Disentanglement Decisions ………………………………. 96
2. Moral Absolutism and Institutional Integrity ……………………………………………. 97

3. A Duty-Based Framework

   or University Governance ………………………………… 97 D. Virtue Ethics and Institutional Character…………………………………………………… 98

4. Integrity and Moral Consistency…………………………………………………………… 99

5. Courage in the Face o

   Opposition ……………………………………………………….. 99

6. Justice and Fairness in Institutional Decisions ………………………………………. 100
7. Wisdom in Navigating Complex Moral Terrain ……………………………………….. 101
8. Cultivating Institutional Virtue …………………………………………………………… 101 E. Rawlsian Justice and Institutional Fairness ……………………………………………… 102

9. The “Veil o

   Ignorance” and University Decision-Making ………………………….. 103

10. Distributive Justice and the Allocation o

    Resources ……………………………….. 103

11. Fairness in Academic and Administrative Governance ……………………………. 104

12. Rawlsian Justice as a Guide

    or Institutional Ethics ………………………………… 105 F. The Tension Between Autonomy and Social Responsibility ………………………….. 105

13. Autonomy as a Core Institutional Value ……………………………………………….. 106
14. Social Responsibility as Moral Imperative …………………………………………….. 106

15. Navigating the Tension: Autonomy in Service o

    Social Responsibility …………. 107

16. The Limits o

    Autonomy ……………………………………………………………………. 108

17. A New Framework

    or Ethical University Autonomy ………………………………… 108 G. Moral Legitimacy and Public Accountability …………………………………………….. 109

18. The Importance o

    Public Accountability ……………………………………………… 110

19. Moral Leadership in a Global Context ………………………………………………….. 111

20. The Risks o

    Failing Public Expectations ………………………………………………. 111

21. A Framework

    or Building Moral Legitimacy…………………………………………… 112 H. Summary o — Moral Philosophy o — Disentanglement ……………………………………. 112 VI. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………. 113

                                            6 o ---  115
    

    Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

          7 o ---  115
    

    Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

I. Introduction Universities in the United States have long — aced pressure to sever ties with controversial industries, individuals, and ideologies. 2 These pressures, spanning decades, have placed institutions at the center o — ethical and political debates, — orcing them to navigate the complex challenges o — balancing — inancial interests with social responsibilities. 3 Yet, unlike corporations that bene — it — rom established governance — rameworks, universities lack a coherent theory to guide such critical decision-making.4 This missing “theory o — the university” creates signi — icant legal, ethical, and operational challenges,5 leaving institutions vulnerable to governance — ailures6 and eroding public trust.7

This paper addresses the governance gap by proposing a structured approach to university decision-making that recognizes universities as unique business entities requiring their own theoretical — ramework. It introduces the “Matrix o — University Disentanglement,” a model designed to guide institutions through complex decisions about whether to sever

inancial, operational, or ideological ties. By — ocusing on key governance challenges—such as balancing — iduciary duties with mission-driven goals, standardizing ethical practices to mitigate legal risks, and reducing agency costs associated with decentralized decision- making—this paper lays the groundwork — or developing a comprehensive theory o — the university.

Through in-depth analysis o

historical case studies analyzing how universities responded to eight di —

erent calls — or disentanglement,8 and through detailed analysis o — how twelve universities responded to recent calls to divest — rom Israel,9 this Article demonstrates how universities have incurred substantial legal liabilities and severe reputational harm by

2 Cary Nelson, NO UNIVERSITY IS AN ISLAND: SAVING ACADEMIC FREEDOM, 35-37 (2010) (tracing the history o —

divestment movements and other pressures on university decision-making). 3 See in — ra Part III (discussing case studies that demonstrate the application o — the matrix to guide universities through various governance challenges). 4 Derek Bok, HIGHER LEARNING, 42-43 (1986) (discussing the absence o — a uni — ied model — or university governance compared to corporate governance — rameworks). 5 Joan W. Scott, Knowledge, POWER, AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM, 57-60 (2008) (discussing various governance issues in higher education related to legal compliance, ethical expectations, and organizational dynamics). 6 Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, AN EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF ECONOMIC CHANGE, 44-45 (1982) (explaining how the absence o — theoretical — rameworks can hinder organizational decision-making and adaptation). 7 Cass R. Sunstein, Social Norms and Social Roles in Eric A. Posner, LAW AND ECONOMICS, 142, 145 (2000) (examining how institutions, including universities, can shape and are shaped by changing social norms and the impact o —

ailing to meet public expectations). 8 See in — ra Part III. 9 See in — ra Part IV. 8 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

ailing to apply consistent, principles — rameworks to crucial governance decisions. With these twenty scenarios in mind as illustrations, this Article then connects those — acts to philosophical theories that o —

er — oundations and — rameworks — or consistent approaches to

uture calls — or disentanglement.10 The Article thus demonstrates how the matrix can provide a consistent — ramework — or navigating the ethical, — inancial, and social dimensions o — university governance.11

The enduring nature o

these governance challenges is evident throughout modern history, with universities repeatedly — acing pressure to divest — rom contentious industries and individuals. This paper analyzes and applies its Matrix o — University Disentanglement to illuminate the ethical — rameworks employed in some o — the most controversial university decision o — the past century, including: Jewish quotas in the early 20th century; 12 LGBTQ exclusion in the 1940s;13 anti-Communist purges during the McCarthy era;14 protests against investments linked to the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s;15 and anti- apartheid divestment campaigns in the 1980s.16 These issues have persisted across generations. More recently, demands — or — ossil — uel divestment,17 calls — or academic

10 See in — ra Part V. 11 See in — ra Part VI. 12 Valerie Strauss, A Brie — History o — Antisemitism in U.S. Higher Education, THE WASHINGTON POST (Nov. 13, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/13/how-restricting-jews-created-modern- college-admissions/(discussing the establishment o — Jewish quotas at elite institutions in the early 20th century to limit the number o — Jewish students admitted). 13 Margaret A. Nash & Jenni — er A. R. Silverman, An Indelible Mark: Gay Purges in Higher Education in the 1940s, 75 J. HIST. SOC. 98, 104 (2010) (documenting exclusionary policies targeting LGBTQ — aculty and students at universities during the mid-20th century). 14 Alison D. Graham, The Legacy o — Vietnam War Protests on American College Campuses, 54 AM. J. HIST. EDUC. 375, 379 (2018) (highlighting the impact o — Vietnam War protests on university divestment decisions and ethical challenges). 15 Alison D. Graham, The Legacy o — Vietnam War Protests on American College Campuses, 54 AM. J. HIST. EDUC. 375, 379 (2018) (highlighting the impact o — Vietnam War protests on university divestment decisions and ethical challenges). 16 John Dugard, Divestment — rom South A — rica and the Role o — Universities in Apartheid, 42 INT’L & COMP. L.Q. 155, 160 (1988) (explaining the pressure on universities to divest — rom companies involved in South A — rica’s apartheid regime during the 1980s). 17 Richard W. Painter, Fiduciary Duty and Fossil Fuel Divestment, 16 N.Y.U. J. L. & BUS. 159, 160 (2019) (discussing the rise o — the — ossil — uel divestment movement in higher education, with universities like Stan — ord, Harvard, and the University o — Cali — ornia leading the trend in response to climate change activism). 9 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

boycotts o

Israeli — aculty,18 and controversies over “cancel culture”19 have continued to place universities at the center o — ethical and political con — licts. Indeed, disentanglement challenges are currently playing out in real time, as university leadership struggles to respond contemporary, con — licting demands regarding the ongoing Israel-Hamas War and the emerging Israel-Hezbollah War.20

By examining these pivotal moments, this paper illustrates the systemic nature o

the governance problems universities encounter, underscoring the need — or a consistent

ramework to guide decision-making in response to evolving social expectations and demonstrating a critical gap in the existing understanding o — a theory o — the university.

While some theories about the role and mission o

universities exist in the literature, such as the “Triple Helix” model21 — rom innovation studies—which emphasizes the relationship between universities, industry, and government — or innovation and economic development—these — rameworks do not address the governance challenges that universities — ace. The Triple Helix and similar models — ocus on the university’s role in economic and social change, but they lack the necessary legal and organizational dimensions to guide decision-making and — iduciary responsibilities. Furthermore, the legal literature on university governance is rather thin,22 o — ten — ocusing narrowly on compliance issues or speci — ic areas like Title IX, without o —

ering a broader theoretical model — or governance. This paper seeks to — ill that gap by proposing a — ramework that integrates governance principles with business law concepts, o —

ering a structured approach to guide universities through their unique ethical, legal, and operational challenges.

This paper represents an inductive step toward building a comprehensive theory o

the university by beginning with concrete governance challenges that universities — ace and

18 Cary Nelson & Gabriel Brahm, THE CASE AGAINST ACADEMIC BOYCOTTS OF ISRAEL, 23-25 (2015) (examining the controversies surrounding the BDS movement in higher education and the ethical and governance dilemmas it presents — or universities); Omar Barghouti, BDS: BOYCOTT, DIVESTMENT, SANCTIONS – THE GLOBAL STRUGGLE FOR PALESTINIAN RIGHTS, 78-81 (2011) (arguing that the BDS movement represents a legitimate — orm o — nonviolent resistance aimed at addressing human rights violations and ethical concerns associated with corporate and institutional complicity in Israel’s policies). 19 Jonathan Haidt & Greg Lukiano —

, THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND: HOW GOOD INTENTIONS AND BAD IDEAS ARE SETTING UP A GENERATION FOR FAILURE, 79-80 (2018) (examining how “cancel culture” controversies on university campuses re — lect broader societal debates over — ree speech and ideological con — ormity). 20 See in — ra Part IV. 21 The “Triple Helix” model was developed by Henry Etzkowitz and Loet Leydesdor —

in the 1990s and — ocuses on the interactions between universities, industry, and government to — oster innovation and economic development. See Henry Etzkowitz & Loet Leydesdor —

, THE TRIPLE HELIX: UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRY-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS: A LABORATORY FOR KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (1995). While in — luential in the — ields o —

innovation studies and sociology o

science, the model does not engage with governance or legal principles that are central to the challenges — aced by universities in areas such as — iduciary duties and decision-making. 22 Robert O’Neil, ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN THE WIRED WORLD, 23-25 (2008) (noting the limited — ocus o — higher education law on governance as compared to compliance). 10 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

using them to in

orm a broader theoretical — ramework. By addressing speci — ic issues— such as — iduciary duties, ethical decision-making, and agency costs—this paper aims to turn the “unknown unknown” o — the missing theory into a “known unknown,” setting the stage — or — urther theoretical development. It does not claim to resolve an entire governance

ramework in a single paper; rather, this Article seeks to start at the heart o — the matter by addressing some o — the most pressing governance challenges in higher education today, particularly in a time o — crisis when public trust in universities is at risk. 23

Building on this

oundation, the “Matrix o — University Disentanglement” serves as a practical tool to guide universities through complex decisions about whether to sever

inancial, operational, or ideological ties. The matrix categorizes these decisions along two key dimensions: the mode o — disentanglement (boycott or divestment) and the basis — or action (perspective or identity).24 By systematically addressing these dimensions, the

ramework o —

ers a structured approach to navigating ethical, legal, and — inancial considerations. It equips universities to reconcile their dual roles as educational institutions and — inancial stewards, enabling more consistent governance practices that align mission-driven goals with — iduciary obligations. In doing so, the matrix helps bridge a critical gap in business law scholarship regarding the governance o — non-corporate entities.

The paper is organized into six parts. This Part I presented the context o

university disentanglement and established the need — or a theory o — the university that provides guidance when institutions — aced pressure to sever ties with controversial industries, individuals, or ideologies. Part II introduces the “Matrix o — University Disentanglement” as an analytical — ramework that meets this need and explains its two key dimensions. Part III presents eight historical disentanglement scenarios that illustrate the complexities o —

these governance decisions and demonstrate the matrix’s practical application. Part IV zooms in to the present disentanglement conundrum by providing detailed — acts regarding how twelve universities responded to very recent calls to disentangle — rom Israel and/or the Palestinian cause, and this Part IV analyzes how unprincipled or situational decision making caused substantial legal liability and severe reputational harm. Part V explores the moral and ethical considerations underpinning university decision-making, providing a philosophical perspective on the matrix’s implications and o —

ering a methodology — or principled decision making. Finally, Part VI concludes with recommendations on how universities can align their actions with ethical obligations while maintaining — inancial

23 Je —

rey M. Jones, Con — idence in U.S. Higher Education Down Since 2015, GALLUP (July 17, 2018), https://news.gallup.com/poll/237240/con — idence-higher-education-down-2015.aspx (reporting on declining public con — idence in higher education institutions in recent years). 24 C — . Henry Mintzberg, STRUCTURE IN FIVES: DESIGNING EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATIONS, 42-45 (1983) (discussing how organizational structures can adapt to di —

erent types o — decisions). 11 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

stability and public accountability. Through this analysis, the paper advances the understanding o — non-corporate governance and o —

ers a path — orward — or legal re — orms that accommodate the unique nature o — universities as complex business entities.

Ultimately, this paper seeks to lay the groundwork

or a broader conversation about the governance o — universities as unique business entities. By addressing some o — the most pressing ethical and operational challenges through the lens o — business law, it aims to spark — urther scholarly e —

orts to develop a comprehensive theory o — the university. The Matrix o — University Disentanglement is presented not as the — inal answer but as an essential starting point—one that provides immediate practical guidance while paving the way — or — uture theoretical advancements.

II. The Matrix o

University Disentanglement as Analytical Framework Universities — ace a distinctive set o — governance challenges, especially when considering whether to sever — inancial or operational ties with entities or practices that con — lict with their values. These challenges are compounded by the absence o — a uni — ied — ramework to guide ethical decision-making, leading to heightened business risks, elevated agency costs, and legal uncertainties. Existing governance models, particularly those adapted

rom corporate contexts such as shareholder primacy, are insu —

icient — or addressing the unique complexities o — universities. Unlike corporations, universities must balance not only — inancial objectives but also social and ethical responsibilities, as well as public expectations.

To navigate these multi

aceted demands, universities require a tool speci — ically designed to integrate the various dimensions o — their decision-making process. This Article introduces the “Matrix o — University Disentanglement” as that tool—a structured

ramework capable o — accounting — or the — inancial, ethical, legal, and reputational — actors that universities must consider when making disentanglement decisions. By systematically weighing these elements, the matrix helps universities make consistent and legally de — ensible choices while addressing the speci — ic needs o — educational institutions.

A. Why Traditional Governance Models Fall Short Traditional governance tools used in corporate decision-making, such as cost-bene — it analysis and risk management — rameworks, typically prioritize — inancial outcomes above all else. While these approaches are e —

ective in corporate settings where shareholder interests dominate, they do not — ully accommodate the broader public mission o —

universities or the complex ethical landscape in which these institutions operate. For

                                      12 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

instance, divestment decisions at universities o

ten involve balancing — inancial impacts against moral obligations to address social injustices, something that standard corporate governance — rameworks do not adequately capture.

The Matrix o

University Disentanglement addresses these limitations by o —

ering a multi-

aceted approach that integrates not only — inancial considerations but also ethical and social dimensions. This holistic — ramework ensures that universities can evaluate their decisions in a way that aligns with their dual role as both economic actors and moral leaders. In doing so, the matrix — ills a critical gap in existing governance models, bringing business law principles into the realm o — university decision-making.

 B. How the Matrix Solves the Governance Puzzle The Matrix o ---  University Disentanglement serves as a practical tool that provides a structured approach to complex decision-making scenarios. For example, when considering divestment  --- rom a controversial industry, the matrix allows university leaders to systematically evaluate  --- actors such as  --- inancial risk, ethical imperatives, stakeholder opinions, and potential legal liabilities. By laying out these considerations in a structured

ormat, the matrix guides decision-makers through the various trade-o —

s, helping them arrive at a conclusion that is not only ethically sound but also legally de — ensible.

Furthermore, the matrix’s adaptability makes it suitable

or a wide range o —

disentanglement scenarios, whether the issue at hand involves

inancial investments, partnerships, or a —

iliations with external entities. Its — lexibility allows universities to tailor the — ramework to speci — ic circumstances while maintaining a consistent approach to governance. This ensures that decision-making processes are transparent, structured, and aligned with both institutional values and legal obligations.

 C. The Matrix as an Innovative Organizational Governance Tool The introduction o ---  the Matrix o ---  University Disentanglement represents a signi --- icant innovation in university governance. It extends beyond traditional business law principles by incorporating ethical considerations into the legal and  --- inancial analysis, o ---

ering a comprehensive — ramework that accommodates the unique nature o — universities as business organizations. 25 The matrix enables universities to reduce agency costs, mitigate legal risks, and make governance decisions that uphold their social responsibilities while maintaining — inancial stability.

25 See Clark Kerr, THE USES OF THE UNIVERSITY 100 (2001) (“Involvement in the li — e o — society has grown greatly . . . How to serve the city, as the rural community has long been served, is now a perplexing problem — or many campuses. New pressure groups are insisting that knowledge really be — or ‘everybody’s sake.’”) 13 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

By providing a tool that integrates these diverse

actors, the Matrix o — University Disentanglement not only addresses the shortcomings o — existing governance models but also advances the understanding o — how business law can be applied to non-corporate entities. In some cases, the demand is — or universities to boycott certain ideologies or practices;26 in others, the call is — or divestiture — rom — inancially entangled entities. 27 In all

our cases, the Matrix o —

ers a roadmap — or university leaders to navigate the increasingly complex demands o — modern governance, helping them make decisions that are consistent, accountable, and aligned with the broader public good.

 D. Lexicon To clari --- y the distinction between ethics and morality within the  --- ramework o ---  university governance, it is essential to de --- ine these terms as they pertain to institutional decision- making:

Ethics re

ers to the set o — principles or guidelines that govern the behavior o — individuals and institutions, o — ten codi — ied by external authorities, 28 such as pro — essional standards, legal obligations, or organizational policies. In the context o — universities, ethical considerations typically relate to institutional responsibilities, such as — iduciary duties to maintain — inancial health, adherence to compliance requirements, or obligations to stakeholders. Ethical decisions are systematic, rule-based, and grounded in established norms or expectations within speci — ic pro — essional or legal contexts. They o — ten involve aligning conduct with clear standards to mitigate risks and uphold the institution’s — ormal obligations.

Morality, on the other hand, encompasses the personal or collective principles o

right and wrong, shaped by cultural, religious, or societal values. 29 While ethical decisions tend to be more codi — ied and universally recognized, moral decisions are o — ten abstract and situational, addressing deeper questions o — justice, human rights, and identity. Morality operates at a more personal or communal level, o — ten re — lecting emotional, ideological, or philosophical convictions about what is considered just and — air. In university governance, moral considerations may drive decisions that go beyond mere compliance with rules to re — lect a commitment to broader social values or causes.

26 See discussion in — ra Part III (outlining historic examples o — calls to boycott as well as to divest — rom companies based on discrimination or perceived harm — ul practices). 27 Id. 28 Ethic – De — inition, MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethic (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 29 The De — inition o — Morality, STAN. ENCYCLOPEDIA PHIL. (Sept. 8, 2020), https://plato.stan — ord.edu/entries/morality-de — inition/ 14 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

By understanding these distinctions, the Matrix o

University Disentanglement can be used to assess both ethical obligations—such as compliance with — iduciary duties—and moral imperatives—such as acting in accordance with social justice principles. The matrix helps universities navigate the tension between rule-based ethical guidelines and the more — luid demands o — moral leadership.

E. The Matrix o

University Disentanglement Universities — ace distinct governance challenges when deciding whether to sever ties with entities or practices that con — lict with their values. Unlike corporate entities, which rely on established — rameworks such as shareholder primacy to guide decision-making, universities must balance — inancial obligations with social and ethical responsibilities. Traditional governance tools, such as cost-bene — it analysis and risk management

rameworks, o — ten prioritize — inancial outcomes, neglecting the broader ethical dimensions and reputational risks that universities must consider. These limitations create a need — or a governance — ramework speci — ically tailored to address the complexities o — university decision-making.

The Matrix o

University Disentanglement addresses this gap by providing a structured approach that integrates traditional business law principles—such as — iduciary duties, risk management, and agency costs—with the unique ethical imperatives and social responsibilities that universities — ace. The matrix enables universities to systematically evaluate the — inancial, legal, and moral implications o — their decisions. This approach allows institutions to navigate governance challenges in a manner that aligns both with business law standards and the institution’s values.

F. Why the Matrix Is Necessary Traditional business governance models, such as cost-bene — it analysis, are insu —

icient — or addressing the ethical and moral complexities unique to universities. While these models e —

ectively manage — inancial risk and legal liability, they o — ten — all short in guiding institutions through the nuances o — social justice considerations, public accountability, and ideological opposition. The Matrix o — University Disentanglement o —

ers a holistic solution by combining the rigor o — business law principles with the — lexibility needed to incorporate ethical and moral considerations into governance decisions.

G. The Two Axes o

the Matrix The Matrix o — University Disentanglement — ramework is designed around two key axes: Boycott vs. Divestiture and Perspectives vs. Identities. These axes capture the primary dimensions along which universities evaluate their decisions to sever ties or cease

                                      15 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

collaboration with external entities, providing a structured approach to navigating the complex landscape o — ethical and moral considerations.

    1. Boycott vs. Divestiture

Boycott re

ers to the active re — usal to engage, collaborate, or support speci — ic individuals, organizations, or companies due to ideological opposition.30 Boycotts are o — ten motivated by calls to reject ideas, behaviors, or actions that con — lict with the institution’s ethical standards or moral principles. For universities, boycotting may involve ending relationships with companies involved in controversial practices, such as labor exploitation, or re — using to host speakers who espouse divisive ideologies.

Divestiture, on the other hand, involves the withdrawal o

inancial investments or severance o — economic relationships with entities whose practices are deemed unethical or immoral.31 Divestiture is a more — inancially direct response, o — ten driven by public pressure or internal values aimed at ceasing monetary support — or industries or organizations involved in practices such as — ossil — uel extraction or arms manu — acturing. It represents a tangible shi — t in — inancial strategy aligned with ethical or moral convictions.

    2. Perspectives vs. Identities

Perspectives

ocus on ideas, corporate practices, or ideologies. 32 Universities may choose to boycott or divest based on the actions, behaviors, or stances that an entity represents, such as a corporation’s involvement in war pro — iteering or contributing to environmental degradation. Decisions made along the perspectives axis re — lect the institution’s stance on speci — ic practices or ideas rather than targeting an entity’s inherent characteristics.33

Identities, by contrast, relate to intrinsic characteristics, such as nationality, religion, ethnicity, or race.34 Universities may encounter pressure to disengage — rom a —

iliations with certain identity groups, countries, or organizations due to moral or political objections. 35 Decisions on this axis may involve signi — icant ethical complexity, as disentangling based

30 Boycott – De — inition, MERRIAM- WEBSTER DICTIONARY, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boycott (last visited Sept. 1, 2024). 31 Laura E. Deeks, Discourse and Duty: University Endowments, Fiduciary Duty, and the Cultural Politics o —

Fossil Fuel Divestment, 47 Env’t. Law, 335, 353 (2017). 32 Perspective – De — inition, MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY, https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/perspective (last visited Sept. 1, 2024). 33 See discussion in — ra Part III.E. (exploring the calls — or divestiture — rom companies engaged in the — ossil — uel industry). 34 Identity – De — inition, MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/identity, (last visited Sept. 1, 2024). 35 See discussion in — ra Part III.F. (exploring the anti-Israel BDS movement circa 2005). 16 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

on identity can raise questions o

discrimination, justice, and the role o — the institution in supporting or opposing broader sociopolitical movements.

H. Four Quadrants o

University Disentanglement These two axes create — our quadrants, each representing a distinct type o — university disentanglement.

   1. Boycott Based on Perspectives: Ideological Rejection

This quadrant involves decisions to cease collaboration or support based on ideological or ethical opposition to an entity’s ideas, actions, or corporate practices. Universities in this category re — use to engage with entities that represent controversial ideas or participate in practices contrary to the institution’s values.

For example, a university may boycott a company involved in promoting harm

ul political lobbying or environmental destruction. Similarly, a decision to re — use speakers or partnerships with organizations that propagate discriminatory ideologies or anti- democratic principles would — all into this quadrant.

These decisions are grounded in a rejection o

ideas and behaviors rather than individuals’ or entities’ inherent characteristics, making the ethical reasoning clearer in cases involving contested practices.

   2. Boycott Based on Identities: Identity Exclusion

In this quadrant, a university’s decision to boycott is based on the inherent characteristics o — the individuals or organizations, such as nationality, race, religion, or other identity- based attributes. This — orm o — disentanglement re — lects broader political or moral objections related to identity-based policies.

For example, a university might choose to avoid hosting an event associated with a country that en — orces discriminatory laws against marginalized groups, or it could re — use to collaborate with organizations connected to regimes that violate human rights.

Boycotts based on identities o

ten raise challenging questions about — airness, justice, and the risk o — discriminatory practices, leading to more complex ethical evaluations. Universities must weigh whether they are addressing institutional or systemic wrongs without un — airly targeting individuals based on immutable characteristics.

   3. Divestiture Based on Perspectives: “Principled disengagement”

In this quadrant, universities divest

rom companies or industries based on opposition to their business practices or ideologies. The withdrawal o —

inancial support re — lects an

                                       17 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

institution’s stance on issues like environmental harm, labor exploitation, or political corruption.

Common examples include divestment

rom industries like — ossil — uels, tobacco, or

irearms manu — acturing, where the university seeks to distance itsel —

rom business practices that con — lict with its stated ethical or environmental goals.

Divestiture based on perspectives is o

ten seen as a clear and direct way — or universities to align their — inancial strategies with their ethical stances, re — lecting a concrete disapproval o — harm — ul corporate behaviors or ideologies.

   4. Divestiture Based on Identities: “Identity-Alignment Withdrawal”

This quadrant represents the severance o

inancial ties due to the inherent identity-based characteristics o — the entity in question. Universities may divest — rom corporations, countries, or organizations associated with controversial identity-related issues, such as nationality or race.

For example, A university may divest

rom companies operating in regions known — or racial or religious persecution, or — rom entities tied to regimes that enact policies against speci — ic identity groups.

Divesting based on identities involves complex moral judgments about collective responsibility, and it can sometimes be seen as controversial. Such decisions may be criticized as discriminatory or unjust unless grounded in clear, universally accepted principles o — human rights or justice.

I. Integrating Business Law Principles with Ethical and Moral Imperatives The Matrix o — University Disentanglement integrates business law principles into ethical decision-making by incorporating concepts like — iduciary duties and risk management. By categorizing decisions along ethical and moral lines, it helps distinguish between two distinct approaches: Principled Disengagement and Identity-Alignment Withdrawal, o —

ering a nuanced understanding o — the challenges universities — ace when addressing demands — or disentanglement.

Principled Disengagement, such as divestment

rom industries like — ossil — uels or tobacco, is guided by institutional guidelines, — iduciary duties, and pro — essional norms. These rule-based decisions o — ten arise — rom ethical considerations, where corporate behavior con — licts with the institution’s broader mission. In these cases, the matrix enables universities to align — inancial strategies with ethical obligations, ensuring that governance decisions adhere to established standards while mitigating risks associated with non-compliance or reputational harm. 18 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In contrast, Identity-Alignment Withdrawal addresses decisions driven by moral imperatives tied to justice and identity. Divestments based on nationality, religion, or race o — ten go beyond rule-based guidelines, placing universities in the midst o — contentious political and social debates. Here, the matrix provides a structured approach to balance

inancial responsibilities with commitments to social justice and public accountability, guiding institutions through the complexities o — identity-based decisions.

By systematically addressing both ethical (principled disengagement) and moral (identity- alignment) dimensions, the matrix ensures that governance decisions are not only

inancially sound but also ethically principled and morally de — ensible. This approach equips universities to navigate governance challenges in a way that aligns with business law standards and broader social responsibilities, o —

ering a roadmap — or principled action amid growing public and regulatory scrutiny.

J. Overview o

the University Disentanglement Framework The University Disentanglement Framework o —

ers a practical tool — or analyzing how universities have navigated ideological and identity-based disentanglements across di —

erent historical and contemporary contexts. By applying the — ramework, universities can better understand the motivations and consequences behind these decisions, and assess their alignment with the institution’s values, legal obligations, and strategic goals.

The

ramework’s — our categories—Ideological Rejection, Identity Exclusion, Principled Disengagement, and Identity-Aligned Withdrawal—provide a basis — or evaluating speci — ic cases o — boycott or divestment. For example, in applying the matrix, universities can assess whether divesting — rom — ossil — uels constitutes a Principled Disengagement based on environmental perspectives, or whether re — using to host events connected with certain national governments aligns with Identity Exclusion driven by political or moral objections.

This application helps illuminate the broader ethical, social, and institutional implications o — these decisions by providing structured criteria — or evaluating the trade-o —

s involved. It supports university leaders in navigating the complexities o — disengagement by guiding them in weighing ethical responsibilities against — inancial risks and reputational considerations.

                                                      Basis o ---  Disentanglement
    University Disentanglement
                                                  Perspective              Identity




                                      19 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

                                                        Ideological
                                 Boycott                                       Identity Exclusion
     Mode o ---
                                         Rejection
 Disentanglement                                        Principled              Identity-Aligned
                               Divestment
                                                     Disengagement                Withdrawal Table 1. University Disentanglement Framework

The table serves as a re

erence — or categorizing university actions, aiding in the analysis o —

di

erent — orms o — disengagement to understand the decision-making processes and the ethical, social, and political challenges involved.

III. Eight Historical Examples o

University Disentanglement This Part illustrates the practical application o — the Matrix o — University Disentanglement by examining historical and contemporary case studies where universities — aced signi — icant pressure to sever ties with controversial industries, individuals, or ideologies. These cases, which span various decades and social movements, reveal the complexities and legal risks associated with governance decisions in higher education. From con — licts over war-related investments and civil rights issues to modern debates surrounding — ossil — uel divestment and ideological disputes, these examples demonstrate how the absence o — a coherent governance — ramework leaves universities vulnerable to inconsistent policies and reputational harm. By applying the matrix to these situations, this section seeks to provide a structured approach to understanding how universities can navigate ethical, — inancial, and legal challenges in alignment with their dual roles as educational institutions and

inancial stewards.

 A. Vietnam War Protests – Ideological Rejection The Vietnam War era was a period o ---  intense student activism, particularly on university campuses, where opposition to U.S. involvement in the war was widespread.36 The protests began in the mid-1960s and grew into a signi --- icant movement by the late 1960s and early 1970s, o --- ten targeting universities  --- or their ties to companies that pro --- ited  --- rom the war e ---

ort, such as Dow Chemical and General Electric.37 These companies were seen as war pro — iteers, manu — acturing napalm and other materials used in military operations.

36 Vietnam: Growing War and Campus Protests Threaten Student De — erments, 150 SCIENCE 1567, 1568 (1965) (exploring the uptick in denial o — student de — erments to the dra — t — ollowing extensive protests on college campuses). 37 American Experience, Protests and Backlash, PBS, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/ — eatures/two-days-in-october-student-antiwar-protests- and-backlash/ (exploring the Vietnam War protests on college campuses). 20 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

The protests culminated in sit-ins, strikes, and even violent con

rontations, with student activists demanding that universities divest — rom and boycott these companies. 38

    1. Nature o ---  the Protests

The protests on college campuses were primarily driven by ethical opposition to the war, rooted in a broader anti-imperialist and anti-war ideology.39 Students, — aculty, and even some administrators believed that universities should not be complicit in the war by supporting companies that contributed to the military-industrial complex. This resulted in calls — or boycotts and divestment — rom those corporations. For example, Dow Chemical, which produced napalm, became a central target o — the protests. 40 University students held sit-ins at Dow recruitment o —

ices, disrupted career — airs, and demanded that universities end their relationships with these corporations.41

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix

The Vietnam War protests

it within the Boycott/Perspectives quadrant o — the matrix. In this quadrant, universities are called upon to reject certain ideological perspectives or corporate practices, rather than targeting individuals or identity-based concerns. The student activists saw the war itsel — , and by extension the companies that pro — ited — rom it, as ethically untenable.42 The boycotts and protests were aimed at changing the universities’ complicity in supporting the war e —

ort through their investments and recruitment practices.43 This case illustrates how principled disengagement can emerge

rom an ideological rejection o — corporate behavior, rather than — rom issues related to identity or morality.

Unlike the identity-based targeting seen in the McCarthy era, the Vietnam protests were

ocused on perspectives and practices—in this case, the U.S. government’s imperialist

oreign policy and the corporations that enabled it. The moral imperative was to resist involvement in the war, and students believed that universities had a responsibility to stand in solidarity with those opposing the war, both ethically and ideologically. The protests also highlighted the growing expectation that universities, as public institutions,

38 Id. 39 See Steven Mintz, From Dra — t Cards to Hashtags, INSIDE HIGHER ED (Apr. 25, 2024), https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/2024/04/25/protests-student-protests- vietnam-1960s-campus-higher-ed. 40 See, e.g., A Turning Point, UNIV. WIS. MADISON, https://1967.wisc.edu/index.html (last visited Sept 28, 2024); The University o — Illinois in the Cold War Era 1945-1975: 1967 Protest-Sit-In against DOW Chemical, UNIV . ILL. LIBGUIDES, https://guides.library.illinois.edu/c.php?g=348250&p=2350897 (last visited Sept. 28, 2024) (hereina — ter Sin-In Against Dow). 41 See id. 42 Mintz, supra note 13. 43 Id. 21 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

should align their actions with broader societal values and not simply

ocus on academic and — inancial interests.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

The protests against the Vietnam War represent an ethical challenge to universities. While the war itsel — was seen as a moral issue—one o — imperialism, militarism, and human rights —the — ocus o — the protests was primarily on the ethical implications o — universities’

inancial ties to war-pro — iting corporations.44 This case highlights the ethical responsibility universities — ace in aligning their investments and recruitment practices with their broader societal role. The moral question o — whether the war was just was at the heart o — the protests, but the ethical question was whether universities should continue to support companies that directly contributed to the war.

The protests also raised ethical dilemmas

or university administrators. On one hand, maintaining relationships with companies like Dow Chemical provided — inancial and employment opportunities — or students and — aculty. On the other hand, continuing to support these companies risked compromising the university’s integrity and standing with the anti-war movement. Ultimately, many universities chose to sever ties with war-pro — iting companies, illustrating the power o — student-led ethical activism.

    4. Impact on Universities

The Vietnam War protests had a pro

ound and lasting impact on American universities. In addition to leading to divestment — rom war-pro — iting corporations, the protests also trans — ormed universities into sites o — political activism and social change. 45 The idea that universities should not merely be passive institutions, but should take active stances on moral and ethical issues, became a lasting legacy o — the Vietnam War era. The protests also laid the groundwork — or — uture divestment movements, such as those targeting apartheid in South A — rica and — ossil — uels in the 21st century.

Additionally, the Vietnam War protests highlighted the growing disconnect between university administrators and students, as administrators o — ten prioritized — inancial

44 Sit-In Against Dow, supra note 14; Alex Olson, A Brie — History o — Protest and Divestment, THE DAILY (May 10, 2024), https://www.dailyuw.com/opinion/a-brie — -history-o — -protest-and-divestment/article_ — 0bc07b4-0e92- 11e — -83d2-9b — 1a1d — cd3b.html. 45 See Alison D. Graham, The War in Vietnam, PENN LIBRARIES (2007), https://archives.upenn.edu/exhibits/penn-history/global-engagement/international-crises/vietnam-war/ (discussing the impact o — protests o — the Vietnam War on college campuses, arguing that these are what the American college campus is most associated with). 22 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

stability over the ethical concerns raised by students.46 This tension would continue to shape university governance in the decades that — ollowed.

    5. Analysis

The Vietnam War protests represent a clear case o

principled disengagement in the Boycott/Perspectives quadrant o — the matrix. The protests were driven by ideological opposition to corporate practices, rather than identity-based concerns, and they raised important ethical questions about the role o — universities in society. By analyzing this case within the matrix, we can see how ethical boycotts can serve as power — ul tools — or challenging institutions to align their practices with broader moral and ethical concerns. The protests also illustrate the potential — or student activism to drive signi — icant institutional change, particularly in relation to universities’ — inancial and ethical responsibilities.

 B. Anti-Jewish Quotas – Identity Exclusion In the early 20th century, many prestigious universities in the United States implemented

ormal or in — ormal quotas to limit the admission o — Jewish students.47 This practice, particularly prominent at elite institutions like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, was an identity-based — orm o — boycott rooted in anti-Semitism.48 These quotas sought to reduce the number o — Jewish students in order to preserve the cultural and social character o —

these institutions, which were predominantly Protestant at the time.49

    1. Nature o ---  the Boycott

The anti-Jewish quotas were imposed in response to the growing number o

Jewish immigrants, many o — whom excelled academically and sought admission to elite universities.50 These institutions, concerned about the “Jewish invasion,” implemented quotas to cap Jewish enrollment, o — ten around 10-15% o — the student body.51 The quotas

46 Id. 47 Valerie Strauss, A Brie — History o — Antisemitism in U.S. Higher Education, THE WASHINGTON POST (Nov. 13, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/13/how-restricting-jews-created-modern- college-admissions/. 48 See id. 49 See id. (“Columbia started to see Protestant students going to other schools because they did not like the changing culture at Columbia.”). 50 See id. (“The character o — the campus began to change. Jewish boys were going to school not to participate in a cappella singing and — raternity pranks and intramural sports but to study hard and get a leg up, and this changed the culture in ways that were threatening to the gentry who had considered these schools their own playgrounds.” (internal citations omitted)). 51 See Stephen Steinberg, How Jewish Quotas Began, COMMENTARY (Sept. 1971), https://www.commentary.org/articles/stephen-steinberg/how-jewish-quotas-began/. 23 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

were justi

ied by the notion that Jewish students, seen as socially and culturally distinct, would upset the traditional character o — these universities.52

Unlike divestment movements that target corporations or nation-states, the anti-Jewish quotas directly boycotted individuals based on their religious and ethnic identity.53 Universities rejected or limited Jewish students, not because o — their academic abilities or perspectives, but because o — their inherent identity. This — orm o — boycott institutionalized anti-Semitism and rein — orced discriminatory practices within higher education.

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix

The anti-Jewish quotas

all squarely into the Boycott/Identities quadrant. These actions were a direct boycott o — individuals based solely on their ethnic and religious identity. Universities sought to maintain their social and cultural norms by excluding or limiting Jewish students, viewing their identity as incompatible with the institutions’ elite, Protestant traditions.

This

orm o — moral disentanglement highlights how universities historically used identity- based exclusions to maintain social hierarchies. The boycott o — Jewish students was not about their political or ideological perspectives but about their ethnicity and religion, marking a clear instance o — identity-based moral rejection.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

The anti-Jewish quotas present a clear case o

moral disentanglement. These policies were rooted in a moral rejection o — Jewish identity, — ramed as a threat to the cultural and religious values o — elite institutions. Ethically, universities justi — ied their actions as necessary to preserve institutional character and societal harmony, though these justi — ications were thinly veiled rationalizations o — anti-Semitic prejudice. The moral dimension was tied to Jewish identity, casting it as inherently incompatible with the ethos o — elite academia, re — lecting broader societal xenophobia and exclusion.

    4. Impact on Universities

The impact o

anti-Jewish quotas was signi — icant, both — or Jewish students and — or the universities themselves. Many talented Jewish students were either denied admission to elite universities or — orced to attend less prestigious institutions.54 This exclusion

52 See supra note 13. 53 See id. 54 See Steinberg, supra note 15 (noting the drop in percentage o — Jewish students at prestigious Ivy League universities). 24 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

rein

orced broader societal anti-Semitism and perpetuated discriminatory norms within higher education.55

Over time, as societal attitudes shi

ted and legal — rameworks evolved, these quotas were gradually dismantled.56 However, the legacy o — these policies is still — elt today, as they represent a clear example o — how universities have historically participated in and institutionalized identity-based discrimination.

    5. Analysis

The anti-Jewish quotas o

the early 20th century provide a stark example o — identity-based boycott within higher education. This — orm o — institutional exclusion was deeply rooted in the moral and social codes o — the time, which sought to preserve the cultural homogeneity o — elite universities. In the — ollowing section, we will explore another — orm o — identity-based boycott: the exclusion o — LGBTQ individuals in the mid-20th century.

 C. LGBTQ Faculty and Students Boycott – Identity Exclusion In the mid-20th century, LGBTQ  --- aculty and students  --- aced systematic exclusion  --- rom universities, re --- lecting deep institutional discrimination based on sexual orientation. 57 This exclusion was o --- ten en --- orced through  --- ormal policies and in --- ormal social pressures, with universities re --- using to admit LGBTQ students or employ openly LGBTQ  --- aculty due to moral and cultural opposition to their identity.58

    1. Nature o ---  the Boycott

LGBTQ individuals were

requently ostracized — rom academic environments under the guise o — maintaining moral standards and preserving the reputation o — universities. 59 LGBTQ pro — essors were o — ten — ired or — orced to resign i — their sexual orientation became known, while LGBTQ students were either denied admission or — orced into secrecy to avoid expulsion.60 Universities, many o — which were in — luenced by religious or conservative

55 See generally, Deborah L. Coe & James D. Davidson, The Origins o — Legacy Admissions: A Sociological Explanation, 52 REV. RELIGIOUS RSCH. 233 (2011). 56 See Steinberg, supra note 15 (noting that while quotas were dismantled at least nominally, structures and admissions processes remain in place today that, while seemingly innocuous, may serve as — ronts — or discriminatory admissions practices). 57 See generally Margaret A. Nash & Jenni — er A. R. Silverman, An Indellible Mark: Gay Purges in Higher Education in the 1940s, 55 HIST. EDUC. Q. 441 (2015). 58 Id. 59 Id. 60 Id.; see also Margaret A. Nash, The Hidden History o — Gay Purges in Colleges, HUFFPOST (Dec. 11, 2016), https://www.hu —

post.com/entry/the-hidden-history-o — -gay_b_8760644. 25 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

values, viewed homosexuality as incompatible with their institutional identities and moral missions.61

This

orm o — identity-based exclusion was — ueled by the broader societal belie — that LGBTQ individuals posed a threat to traditional values and morality.62 Unlike the McCarthy-era exclusions that were based on political perspectives, the boycott o — LGBTQ individuals

ocused exclusively on their identity, with no regard — or their academic or intellectual contributions.63

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix

The LGBTQ boycott

its within the Boycott/Identities quadrant o — the matrix, where exclusion is based on an individual’s inherent identity rather than their perspectives or belie — s. Universities enacted this boycott under the pretext o — preserving moral order and institutional reputation, categorizing LGBTQ individuals as incompatible with their academic communities.

This moral disentanglement targeted individuals

or who they were, rather than what they thought or said, making it a clear case o — identity-based exclusion. The justi — ication — or these policies was grounded in the belie — that LGBTQ identities were inherently immoral, re — lecting broader social prejudices at the time.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

In the case o

LGBTQ — aculty and students, the distinction between moral and principled disengagement is equally stark. Morally, universities regarded homosexuality as deviant and contrary to societal values, which led to exclusion and suppression.64 Ethically, universities — ramed their actions as protective o — institutional reputation and moral standards, drawing on religious or cultural values. 65 The exclusion o — LGBTQ individuals was justi — ied under the guise o — institutional integrity, yet it was clearly an identity-based boycott re — lecting moral objections to the existence o — LGBTQ identities within academia.

61 Nash & Silverman, supra note 21. 62 See id. (discussing the — ear at the state level o — national security threats — rom gay employees who may have ties to communism, as well as university concerns — or the reputation o — the universities in question). 63 See Nash, supra note 24 (discussing the case o — a man who was a decorated war hero with high recommendations — rom military superiors who requested an accelerated degree prior to returning to the service — or the Korean war who was denied likely due to his homosexuality). 64 Nash & Silverman, supra note 21. 65 Id. 26 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    4. Impact on Universities

The exclusion o

LGBTQ individuals had signi — icant consequences — or both the individuals and the academic institutions. Many LGBTQ scholars were driven out o — academia, while others were — orced to hide their identities, leading to a culture o — repression and — ear within universities.66 This exclusion sti — led academic — reedom and diversity, particularly in disciplines where the exploration o — alternative perspectives could have enriched intellectual discourse.

The legacy o

these exclusionary practices still resonates in academia today, as the LGBTQ rights movement has pushed — or greater inclusion and representation within universities. 67 While modern universities have largely abandoned these policies, the historical exclusion o — LGBTQ individuals remains a critical example o — identity-based boycott in higher education.

    5. Analysis

The systematic exclusion o

LGBTQ — aculty and students in the mid-20th century re — lects another instance o — identity-based boycott, where universities actively disentangled themselves — rom individuals based on their sexual orientation. This boycott was driven by moral opposition to LGBTQ identities and rein — orced broader social prejudices.

 D. South A --- rica Apartheid Divestment – Principled Disengagement The divestment campaign targeting South A --- rica during the apartheid era was one o ---  the most in --- luential and widespread ethical movements on university campuses. Activists, students, and  --- aculty around the world called  --- or universities to divest  --- rom companies operating in South A --- rica or those that pro --- ited  --- rom its oppressive racial policies. 68 The campaign argued that continued  --- inancial ties with these companies meant tacit approval o ---  apartheid, creating both a moral and ethical imperative to sever such relationships. 69

66 See Nash, supra note 24. 67 Note, — or example, the growth in LGBTQ student groups on campus. See, e.g., About Us, CAMPUS PRIDE, https://www.campuspride.org/about/ (last visited Sept 27, 2024). 68 See, e.g., Tracey Johnson, The Divestment Movement at Rutgers University and the Limits o — Interracial Organizing 1977-1985, in SCARLET AND BLACK (Vol. 3, 2021) (discussing the explosion o — anti-apartheid divestment campaigns at Rutgers University among many other college campuses beginning in the 60s and growing in the 70s and 80s); Jacob Ivey, Divestment and Lemon Meringue Pie: Anti-Apartheid Movements and the University o — Florida in Gainesville, 23 SAFUNDI 46, 47 (2022) (“The mid-1980s saw a signi — icant uptick in the anti-apartheid movement, creating a ‘burst’ o — activity across the United States.”). 69 Johnson supra note 6, at 209-210 (discussing the goal o — the student organizations to achieve complete divestment — rom the South A — rican economy and the view that continued — inancial entanglement, even reduced — rom pre-protest levels was immoral). 27 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    1. The Nature o ---  the Campaign

The anti-apartheid divestment campaign began in the 1960s but reached its peak in the 1980s, with increasing international pressure to end apartheid in South A — rica. 70 Universities became — ocal points o — the movement, as activists argued that academic institutions had a responsibility to reject complicity in the human rights abuses perpetrated by the apartheid government.71 The campaign’s demands were simple but power — ul: universities were to divest — rom any company that did business in or supported South A — rica’s apartheid regime.72 This included industries such as mining, banking, and manu — acturing.

The divestment movement was marked by massive protests on campuses, hunger strikes, and sit-ins, pressuring university administrations to respond.73 The movement was not only about ending — inancial complicity but also about aligning university values with broader ethical principles. The divestment campaign directly challenged universities to rethink their roles as global ethical actors and not just — inancial institutions.

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix

This case

its within the Divestiture/Perspectives quadrant o — the matrix, where the decision to divest is driven by opposition to corporate practices or perspectives rather than identity-based concerns. Unlike the identity-targeted actions o — McCarthyism, the apartheid divestment campaign — ocused on the corporate perspective o — doing business with a government engaged in systemic racial oppression. The central ethical argument was that universities, as institutions committed to justice and equality, could not continue to invest in companies that upheld or pro — ited — rom apartheid.

This quadrant helps

rame the distinction between divestiture campaigns based on ethical concerns about corporate practices versus those based on moral imperatives related to identity. The apartheid campaign, while deeply moral, was — undamentally an ethical decision to disentangle — rom companies whose practices supported a system o — injustice.

70 Id. 71 See Sarah A. Soule, The Student Divestment Movement in the United States and Tactical Di —

usion: The Shantytown Protest, 75 SOCIAL FORCES 855, 855-857 (discussing the widespread protests on American campuses opposing South A — rican apartheid); See also Tracey Johnson, The Divestment Movement at Rutgers University and the Limits o — Interracial Organizing 1977-1985, in SCARLET AND BLACK (Vol. 3, 2021); see also Jacob Ivey, Divestment and Lemon Meringue Pie: Anti-Apartheid Movements and the University o —

Florida in Gainesville, 23 SAFUNDI 46 (2022). 72 Johnson supra note 6, at 209-210 (“Proponents o — divestiture wanted universities to abandon their investments in corporations that supported the South A — rican economy.”). 73

                                              28 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

It was not simply a rejection o

South A — rican identity but a broader rejection o — the practices that upheld apartheid.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

The apartheid divestment movement was driven by both ethical and moral considerations, but the primary — ocus was on the ethical implications o —

inancial complicity. 74 Activists argued that universities had a — iduciary and ethical responsibility to align their investments with the values they espoused in their teaching and mission statements. The moral issue o — apartheid—systemic racial oppression—was clear, but the ethical question revolved around whether universities should pro — it — rom such a system.75 The movement was, at its core, about — orcing institutions to take a stand on ethical grounds rather than simply remaining neutral.

Ethical considerations involved the

inancial entanglement o — universities with companies that perpetuated apartheid.76 By severing these ties, universities aimed to demonstrate that they were not merely passive investors but active participants in shaping global justice.

    4. Impact on Universities

The impact o

the apartheid divestment campaign on universities was pro — ound. Many institutions eventually caved to student and — aculty pressure, leading to widespread divestments — rom companies operating in South A — rica.77 The movement also paved the way — or — uture divestment campaigns, such as those targeting the — ossil — uel industry and tobacco companies. It set a precedent — or universities being held accountable — or their investment practices and demonstrated the power o — grassroots activism in shaping institutional policies.78

More importantly, the campaign reshaped how universities understood their ethical responsibilities in the global arena. No longer could universities claim neutrality in the — ace o — human rights abuses; the apartheid divestment movement — orced them to acknowledge

74 See Ivey supra note 6, at 52 (analyzing the tension between protestors and trustees, with the trustees opposing divestment — or divestments sake, but the student protestors adamantly insisting on the necessity o — divestment in order to avoid responsibility — or the injustice o — apartheid). 75 See id. (some trustees believe that while apartheid is clearly immoral, this does not necessarily require university divestment where the e —

ect o — divestment is uncertain or even potentially counterproductive). 76 See Johnson supra note 6, at 209. 77 See, e.g., id. at 224 (noting Rutgers’ decision to completely divest — rom companies doing business with South A — rica). 78 The protests o — South A — rican Apartheid are widely viewed as one o — the most in — luential protest campaigns in political history, creating a new era and — orm o — political involvement by the populace. See Ivey supra note 6, at 46 29 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

their role as ethical actors in a global context. Universities were no longer seen as merely educational institutions but as key players in the global struggle — or justice.

    5. Analysis

The South A

rica apartheid divestment campaign stands as a power — ul example o —

principled disengagement in the Divestiture/Perspectives quadrant o

our matrix. It illustrates how divestiture can serve as a tool — or universities to align their — inancial practices with their ethical values, without targeting identities or individual a —

iliations. The movement also highlighted the power o — sustained activism in — orcing institutions to con — ront their ethical responsibilities and take meaning — ul action. Through this case, the matrix demonstrates the importance o — distinguishing between identity-based Identity- Alignment Withdrawal and perspective-based ethical divestment, with the latter o — ten leading to broader institutional change.

 E. Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement – Principled Disengagement The  --- ossil  --- uel divestment movement gained signi --- icant momentum in the 2010s. It calls

or universities to divest — rom companies involved in — ossil — uel extraction and production, citing environmental concerns and the ethical responsibility to combat climate change. 79 Similar to the apartheid movement, student activists argue that universities should align their investments with their stated commitments to sustainability and environmental justice.80

    1. Nature o ---  the Campaign

The

ossil — uel divestment movement mirrors the earlier apartheid campaign in several ways but — ocuses speci — ically on the global climate crisis. As climate science has shown the signi — icant contribution o —

ossil — uel consumption to global warming, universities have come under pressure — rom students, — aculty, and environmental organizations to divest

rom companies involved in the — ossil — uel industry.81 These companies are seen as major contributors to environmental degradation and climate change, raising the ethical question o — whether universities should continue to pro — it — rom these investments while claiming to promote sustainability.82

79 Benjamin J. Richardson, Universities Unloading on Fossil Fuels: The Legality o — Investing, 10 CARBON AND CLIMATE LAW REVIEW 62, 62 (2016). 80 Id. at 64. 81 Id. at 62. 82 See id. at 64 (quoting a statement released by a student organization calling — or Harvard to divest, “As Harvard continues to establish itsel — as a leader in campus sustainability, it must be ready to engage in sustainable practices at all levels–especially with regards to its investment activities”) 30 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Proponents argue that universities have a responsibility to help mitigate climate change by severing ties with — ossil — uel companies and instead investing in renewable energy or sustainable technologies.83 Critics, however, argue that divestment would have little

inancial impact on the — ossil — uel industry and that universities could better address climate change through research and innovation rather than divestiture.84

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix

This movement clearly

its within the Divestiture/Perspectives quadrant o — the matrix. The call to divest — rom — ossil — uel companies is rooted in ethical opposition to their business practices and environmental impact rather than in targeting individual identities.85 The ethical — ramework here revolves around corporate responsibility and the role o — universities in — ostering a sustainable — uture. By divesting, universities aim to distance themselves — rom industries that are seen as contributing to global harm, aligning their — inancial practices with their ethical and academic values.

This quadrant helps di

erentiate between divestment campaigns driven by ethical concerns about global sustainability versus those driven by moral concerns about identity- based injustices. While — ossil — uel companies are not being targeted — or their corporate identities, they are being boycotted — or the ethical implications o — their business practices, much like the companies in the apartheid divestment campaign.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

Like the apartheid divestment movement, the

ossil — uel divestment campaign is driven by ethical concerns, speci — ically regarding the role o — universities in exacerbating or mitigating climate change. The central question is whether universities, as global institutions committed to the public good, should continue to invest in industries that contribute to the destruction o — the environment.

The movement also presents a moral dimension, as it engages with the broader ethical debate around climate justice and the rights o —

uture generations. However, the primary

ocus remains on the ethical responsibilities o — universities to align their investment strategies with their environmental commitments. In this case, principled disengagement

rom — ossil — uel investments is seen as a necessary step toward — ul — illing those commitments.

83 Id. 84 Noam Bergman, Impacts o — Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement: E —

ects on Finance, Policy, and Public Discourse, SCIENCE POLICY RESEARCH UNIT, UNIV. SUSSEX 2 (2018) (“Divestment has been criticized — or having no signi — icant impact on — ossil — uel — unding and — or its political and — inancial naivete.”). 85 See source and accompanying text supra note 9. 31 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    4. Impact on Universities

The

ossil — uel divestment movement has already had a signi — icant impact on universities around the world. Several prestigious institutions, including Harvard and the University o —

Cali

ornia, have committed to divesting — rom — ossil — uels, citing the need to address the climate crisis.86 The movement has also reshaped the conversation around sustainable investments, leading universities to adopt more comprehensive sustainability policies that include not just divestment but also investments in renewable energy and green technologies.87

However, the movement has also

aced criticism — rom some university administrators and

inancial experts, who argue that divestment is largely symbolic and unlikely to impact the

ossil — uel industry in any meaning — ul way.88 Additionally, some universities have resisted divestment, citing concerns about — inancial stability and — iduciary responsibilities to their endowments.89

    5. Analysis

The

ossil — uel divestment movement provides a contemporary example o — principled disengagement in the Divestiture/Perspectives quadrant o — the matrix. Like the apartheid divestment campaign, it seeks to align university investments with ethical values, particularly regarding global sustainability and environmental responsibility. By analyzing this case within the matrix, we can see how universities are being called upon to play a more active role in addressing global challenges through their — inancial decisions. This case also highlights the ethical tension between — inancial stability and moral

86 Naomi Oreskes & So — ia Andrade, Harvard and Other Schools Make a Choice on Fossil Fuels, THE NEW YORK TIMES (Oct. 2, 2021) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/02/opinion/divestment- — ossil- — uels-harvard.html (“This month, the University o — Minnesota, Boston University and Harvard, our institution, announced that they’ll divest — rom the — ossil — uel industry.”); Leah Asmelash, The University o — Cali — ornia Has Fully Divested From Fossil Fuels. It’s the Largest School in the US to Do It. CNN (May 20, 202 4:03 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/20/us/university-o — -cali — ornia-divest- — ossil- — uels-trnd/index.html. 87 See, e.g., U o — I System Expands Commitment to Sustainable Investments, UNIV. OF ILL SYS. NEWS (Oct. 13, 2022, 8:00 AM) https://news.uillinois.edu/view/7815/1433298724; SUSTAINABLE GW, https://sustainability.gwu.edu/investment (last visited Sept 1, 2024) (GW engages with investment managers to encourage their investment in companies with environmentally sustainable business practices and to accelerate their transition to — ossil- — ree port — olios.”). 88 Benjamin J. Richardson, Fossil Fuels Divestment: Is it Law — ul?, 39 UNIV. OF NEW SOUTH WALES L.J. 1686, 1686 (2016) (“The . . . campaign is opposed by many — inanciers, and governments too, — or reasons that include the belie — that divesting is — inancially irresponsible, it cannot leverage positive change and that it is unlaw — ul or legally dubious.”) 89 Benjamin J. Richardson, Universities Unloading on Fossil Fuels: The Legality o — Investing, 10 CARBON AND CLIMATE LAW REVIEW 62, 62 (2016) (noting MIT’s re — usal to divest due to legal and — inancial concerns, and the perceived ine —

icacy o — the strategy). 32 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

responsibility, a theme that continues to shape debates around university governance in the 21st century.

   F. Boycott, Divest, Sanction Movement – Identity-Alignment Withdrawal The 2005 BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement emerged in response to the intensi --- ying Israeli-Palestinian con --- lict,90 speci --- ically a --- ter the Second Inti --- ada (2000-2005), a period marked by widespread violence and military incursions in Palestinian territories. 91 This campaign called on universities to divest  --- rom Israeli companies and institutions as a protest against allegations o ---  human rights violations by Israel in the Palestinian territories,92 a claim contested by various international actors. Advocates argued that

inancial entanglement with Israeli — irms and the Israeli government was morally inde — ensible, drawing on precedents like the South A — rican apartheid movement.93

       1. The Nature o ---  the Campaign

The BDS campaign was launched

ormally in July 2005 by a coalition o — Palestinian civil society organizations.94 It was — ramed as a non-violent resistance movement aimed at holding Israel accountable — or its treatment o — Palestinians. 95 The movement called — or three speci — ic actions: (1) ending the Israeli occupation o — Palestinian territories96; (2) recognizing the — undamental rights o — Arab-Palestinian citizens o — Israel97; and (3) promoting the right o — return — or Palestinian re — ugees.98

90 Jim Zanotti, et al., Israel and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, 8 CURRENT POLITICS AND ECONOMICS OF THE MIDDLE EAST 285, 288 (2017). 91 Ali Adam, Palestinian Inti — ada: How Israel Orchestrated a Bloody Takeover, AL JAZEERA (Sept. 28, 2020), https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/9/28/palestinian-inti — ada-20-years-later-israeli-occupation- continues; see also The Second Inti — ada 2000, ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE (Sept. 1, 2016), https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/second-inti — ada-2000; Ian Oxnevad, THE COMPANY THEY KEEP 16 (2023). 92 Daniel Henninger, The Cookie-Cutter Campus Protests: Anti-Israel Students, WALL STREET JOURNAL (Oct. 2023), https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cookie-cutter-campus-protests-anti-israel-students- dc — deb9b?st=7il2q5r3d648wbu&re — link=desktopwebshare_permalink. 93 See Zanotti supra note 26, at 289. 94 Henninger supra note 26. 95 See generally, Omar Barghouti, On the Ethics o — Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, in J. Kehaulani Kauanui, INDIGENOUS POLITICS: CONVERSATIONS WITH ACTIVISTS, SCHOLARS, AND TRIBAL LEADERS (2018) (discussing the dual system o — law in Israel which applies di —

erently to Jewish people than it does to Palestinians). 96 Id. 97 Id. 98 Id. at 289. 33 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In practical terms, these goals translated into demands

or universities to divest — rom Israeli companies, sever academic collaborations, and boycott Israeli products. 99 Central to the campaign was the perspective that universities as moral actors should reconsider investments tied to what they view as human rights abuses. Student groups and — aculty across universities began to agitate — or university boards and endowments to sever ties with corporations involved in in — rastructure, military, and settlement expansions in the West Bank and Gaza.100

       2. Application o ---  the Matrix

The 2005-era BDS campaign

its into the Divestiture/Identities quadrant o — the matrix. The

ocus was not on corporate mal — easance or — inancial misconduct, but on the identity o —

Israel as a nation-state. The movement

ramed Israel’s policies as inseparable — rom its national identity, positioning divestiture as a stand against an entire nation rather than speci — ic business practices.101 Unlike divestment campaigns targeting — ossil — uels or tobacco, which sought to change corporate behavior, the BDS movement made a broader moral claim by tying Israel’s political actions directly to its national character.

       3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

The campaign raised signi

icant ethical and moral questions. Ethically, universities were asked to weigh their — inancial responsibilities against their roles as institutions o — moral leadership. BDS advocates expressed concern that universities were involved in supporting what they view as Israel’s occupation by — inancially bene — iting — rom companies tied to Israel’s military and in — rastructural apparatus.102 The moral argument extended beyond the economic, calling — or a symbolic disavowal o — Israel’s state policies and practices, which were equated with what was described by some as systematic control.

99 Jim Zanotti, et al., Israel and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, 8 CURRENT POLITICS AND ECONOMICS OF THE MIDDLE EAST 285, 289 (2017) (discussing calls to boycott Israel and their products as well as divest — rom Israeli companies in a manner similar to that employed in response to South A — rican apartheid). 100 See Nina Lakhani, BDS Founder Hails Campus Protests — or Taking Israeli Divestment Mainstream, THE GUARDIAN (June 4, 2024), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/04/bds-omar-barghouti- israel-campus-protests (discussing explosion o — campus protests calling — or divestment — rom Israeli economy); see also Zanotti supra not 26, at 290 (discussing Israeli settlements speci — ically). 101 See id. 102 Palestinian Campaign — or the Academic and Cultural Boycott o — Israel, Universities are Ending Complicity in Israeli Apartheid and Its Gaza Genocide in Numbers Never Seen Be — ore, BDS MOVEMENT (May 19, 2024), https://bdsmovement.net/news/universities-are-ending-complicity-israeli-apartheid-and-its-gaza-genocide- numbers-never-seen; see also Lakhani supra note 36 (noting prominent BDS activist Omar Barghouti’s comments that students were exposing the hypocrisy o — universities that “put ‘pro — it be — ore people and the planet’”). 34 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

However, critics o

the BDS movement questioned whether targeting the policies o — Israel’s government, rather than speci — ic practices, was an appropriate ethical approach. They argued that — raming divestiture as a response to identity risked creating a — orm o — collective punishment, where individuals or entities unconnected to human rights abuses would bear the brunt o — economic consequences.103 This ethical dilemma made the BDS campaign a complex moral issue — or universities to navigate.

    4. Impact on Universities

The 2005-era BDS campaign had a pro

ound impact on universities, even though — ew institutions — ully embraced divestment. Student-led protests and — aculty petitions created signi — icant pressure on university administrations to address the moral questions raised by the movement.104 Several universities, such as Harvard and MIT, — ormed committees to evaluate their investment port — olios, but most stopped short o — divesting — rom Israeli companies.105 The discussions, however, — orced universities to engage in debates about their ethical responsibilities in global con — licts.

Universities also began to institutionalize these conversations by creating

rameworks — or evaluating their investments — rom a social responsibility perspective.106 The debates around BDS — urther polarized campuses, with intense opposition to the movement emerging — rom both students and — aculty who viewed the campaign as anti-Semitic or overly broad in its targeting o — Israel.107

    5. Analysis

The 2005 BDS campaign represented a signi

icant moment in the evolution o — university divestiture movements, as it moved away — rom targeting corporate wrongdoing and

ocused instead on the identity o — a nation-state. In contrast to prior divestment e —

orts, such as those against apartheid South A — rica, the BDS campaign made the question o —

national identity central to the divestment argument. This shi

t introduced a new

103 See Glenn C. Altschuler & David Wippman, The Campus War o — Words Over Antisemitism and the BDS Movement, THE HILL (Dec. 17, 2023), https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4364136-the-campus-war-over- words-on-israel-and-palestine/ (discussing the negligible economic impact o — the movement and the — ear that it is really a challenge to Israel’s right to exist and ends up punishing individual Jews who support this right). 104 See Nathan Thrall, BDS: How a Controversial, Non-Violent Movement Has Trans — ormed the Israeli- Palestinian Debate, THE GUARDIAN (August 14, 2018) https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/14/bds- boycott-divestment-sanctions-movement-trans — ormed-israeli-palestinian-debate (discussing the pressure on universities, among other institutions, created by the growing BDS movement). 105 See, e.g., HARVARD UNIVERSITY SHAREHOLDER RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEES https://www.harvard.edu/shareholder-responsibility-committees/ (last visited Sept 10, 2024). 106 Id. 107 Id. (“Critics responds that BDS is an inherently antisemitic e —

ort…”). 35 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

complexity to university governance, as institutions were now

orced to weigh the implications o — divesting — rom a nation-state with longstanding political and academic ties.

While the campaign was not success

ul in — orcing widespread divestiture, it laid the groundwork — or — uture divestment movements and intensi — ied debates about the role o —

universities in global con

licts. The distinction between identity-based divestiture and perspective-based boycotts would later become even more blurred in the post-October 7, 2023 BDS calls, where universities — ound themselves — acing renewed pressure to sever ties with Israel — ollowing the violent escalation o — the con — lict.

  G. McCarthy Era Purges (1950s): From Ideological Rejection to Identity-
     Based Exclusion The McCarthy Era, spanning the late 1940s and 1950s, was marked by widespread  --- ear o ---

communism, a sentiment

ueled by the Cold War and anti-communist propaganda.108 Senator Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) led a

ervent campaign to identi — y and root out supposed communist sympathizers, whom they viewed as subversives undermining American democracy.109 Universities became prime targets in this e —

ort, as intellectuals and academics were o — ten perceived as harboring le — t- leaning views.110 What began as an ideological movement to combat communism soon morphed into an identity-based purge, whereby individuals were ostracized not — or speci — ic actions, but — or their perceived a —

iliation with communism.

     1. The Descent into Identity-Based Purge

In universities, academics were subjected to intense scrutiny.111 Loyalty oaths were introduced, requiring — aculty to pledge allegiance to the U.S. and denounce communism.112 Some pro — essors were subpoenaed by HUAC or state-level committees, where they were pressured to reveal the identities o — suspected communists among their

108 See Ben W. Heineman, Jr., The University in the McCarthy Era, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (June 17, 1965), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1965/6/17/the-university-in-the-mccarthy-era/ (noting that the period o — the Red Scare generally ran — rom the 1948 Alger Hiss investigation to the Senate censure o — McCarthy in 1955); see also McCarthyism and the Red Scare, THE MILLER CENTER, https://millercenter.org/the- presidency/educational-resources/age-o — -eisenhower/mcarthyism-red-scare. 109 Heineman, supra note 51. 110 Id. (discussing — ormation o — the National Council — or American Education which published a booklet entitled Red-Ucators at Harvard calling out alleged Communist and Marxist propaganda being taught at Harvard and the House Un-American Activities Committee’s commitment to “get[ting] the Reds” in higher education). 111 Heineman, supra note 51. 112 Ellen Schrecker, McCarthyism: Political Repression and the Fear o — Communism, 71 SOC. RSCH. 1041, 1045 (2004) (noting that many companies chose to implement loyalty oaths merely to avoid government scrutiny). 36 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

colleagues.113 Those who re

used to cooperate — aced blacklisting, dismissal, and reputational ruin.114 Rather than serve as bastions o —

ree inquiry, many universities capitulated to external pressures, en — orcing these purges out o —

ear o — losing public support, government — unding, or the con — idence o — trustees and alumni.115

While the McCarthy purges began as an e

ort to disentangle universities — rom a dangerous political ideology, they quickly descended into a — orm o — identity-based exclusion. The term “communist” became less a description o — one’s political stance and more a stigmatizing label—an identity that could not be shed. Faculty members were blacklisted, not — or any explicit actions, but — or their perceived identity as “communists.”116 Even tenuous associations with le — tist organizations or ideas were grounds — or dismissal, regardless o —

the individual’s present belie

s or conduct.

This blurred line between perspective and identity marks a crucial turning point. What initially appeared to be an ethical, albeit controversial, e —

ort to protect national security rapidly spiraled into a moral — ailure as universities abandoned principles o —

ree inquiry and academic — reedom in — avor o — purging those labeled as threats to institutional and national integrity.

    2. Application o ---  the Matrix: Perspective vs. Identity

In our matrix o

university disentanglements, the McCarthy purges exist at the intersection o — Boycott/Perspectives and Boycott/Identities. Initially, universities sought to disentangle themselves — rom those espousing communist perspectives, but over time, communism became an indelible identity marker. This transition — rom ideological opposition to identity-based exclusion serves as a cautionary tale. The purges show how easily ideological rejection can morph into a — orm o — moral panic, where identities are targeted regardless o — an individual’s actual views or actions.

While early in the purges, universities may have justi

ied their actions as protecting institutional ethics (e.g., ensuring loyalty to American democratic principles), they quickly engaged in what can only be seen as identity-based moral disentanglement. This highlights

113 Id. 114 Id. 115 Diana Moyer, University Speaker Censorship in 1951 and Today: New McCarthyism and Community Relations, 41 J. OF THOUGHT. 29, 32–33 (2006) (discussing the anecdote o — Ohio State University’s shi — t in position on outside speakers — ollowing backlash — rom the public and the government during the McCarthy Red Scare). 116 See Schrecker, supra note 55 (noting that many pro — essors were terminated — or pleading the Fi — th as opposed to concrete evidence o — Communist loyalties). 37 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

the dangers o

engaging in such purges, as they o — ten con — late ideological perspectives with — ixed, unchangeable identities, undermining the ethical — oundations o — academia.

    3. Ethical vs. Moral Considerations

The McCarthy purges raise signi

icant ethical and moral questions. Initially, universities justi — ied their actions on ethical grounds, claiming that purging suspected communists was necessary to preserve institutional integrity and align with national security priorities.117 However, as the purges escalated, it became clear that the moral — ramework underpinning these actions was deeply — lawed. The decision to blacklist individuals based on suspicion, rumor, or mere association with le — t-wing ideas re — lected a moral — ailure, one driven by — ear rather than justice. Academic — reedom, a core ethical principle o —

universities, was sacri

iced in — avor o — political expediency.

In hindsight, the McCarthy Era is o

ten viewed as a period o — moral — ailure, in which universities abandoned their ethical duties to protect intellectual — reedom and promote open inquiry. The purges serve as a power — ul reminder o — how identity-based disentanglements—especially when driven by — ear—can lead to long-lasting damage to both individual lives and institutional integrity.

    4. Impact on Universities

The consequences o

the McCarthy purges were — ar-reaching. Many universities lost esteemed — aculty members, and the climate o —

ear sti — led academic discourse — or years. The purges set a troubling precedent: that universities, when — aced with external political pressures, could be swayed to compromise their mission as bastions o —

ree thought and academic integrity. By allowing — ear o — communism to dictate their policies, universities

ailed to uphold the ethical principles o — academic — reedom and intellectual diversity, resulting in a lasting impact on the culture o — academia.

    5. Conclusion: Setting the Stage  --- or Modern Analysis

The McCarthy purges, with their shi

t — rom ideological rejection to identity-based exclusion, provide a crucial — ramework — or understanding the complexities o — university disentanglements. They show how initial ethical motives can easily slide into moral — ailure when the lines between perspectives and identities become blurred. As we turn to modern-day disentanglement e —

orts—such as the ongoing calls — or boycotts and divestment in the context o — the Israel-Palestine con — lict—we must bear in mind the lessons o — McCarthyism. The moral and ethical dilemmas that universities — aced then are

117 Id. at 1069-1070 (noting that an organization which represented 37 leading universities during the period justi — ied terminations with the need to maintain a good public image). 38 o — 115  Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

echoed in today’s challenges, reminding us o

the importance o — critical re — lection when engaging in disentanglements.

 H. Summary o ---  Historical Examples  The historical episodes discussed in the preceding sections reveal the complex ways in  which universities have navigated various  --- orms o ---  disentanglement, whether through  ideological rejection, identity exclusion, principled disengagement, or identity-aligned  withdrawal. These examples highlight how universities have responded to di ---

erent ethical and moral pressures over time, with varying degrees o — success and controversy. The

ollowing table summarizes the key characteristics o — each episode, providing a comparative — ramework to better understand the underlying patterns and distinctions between them.

Quadrant Type De

inition Example

Boycott/Perspectives Ideological Rejection targeting McCarthy Era Rejection ideas, belie — s, or Purge, Vietnam War perspectives. Protests

Boycott/Identities Identity Exclusion Boycotts targeting Anti-Semitic inherent identities, Boycotts, LGBTQ such as ethnicity or Boycotts sexual orientation.

Divestiture/Perspective Principled Divestment based Fossil Fuels, Disengagement on corporate or Tobacco organizational Divestment behavior aligned with ethical principles.

Divestiture/Identities Identity-Aligned Divestment South A

rican Withdrawal targeting national or Apartheid, 2005-Era ethnic identities, BDS Campaign tied to moral convictions. Table 2. Comparative Analysis o — University Disentanglement Strategies in Historical Context.

                                                   39 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

With this historical

ramework in place, we now turn to modern — orms o — disentanglement,

ocusing on the evolving BDS campaigns and their unique place in today’s university landscape.

IV. Contemporary University Reactions to Disentanglement Demands On October 7, 2023, Hamas militants in — iltrated Israel and sparked a global con — lict that quickly garnered worldwide attention. University administrations responded to the events o — October 7 and subsequent protests in varied and multi — aceted ways, re — lecting the complexity o — balancing — ree speech, student sa — ety, and institutional reputation. 118 Such varied responses also re — lected the incoherent nature o — university governance. Virtually every university’s administration was sharply criticized by parties on di —

erent sides o — the protests. Many administrators were hauled be — ore Congress and — orced to resign. Universities su —

ered reputational harm, demonstrated by declining enrollments and reduced donor support. Next, universities and their administrators — ace legal liability, as multiple lawsuits have been — iled regarding their purported misconduct. This Part shows how the absence o — a theory o — the university led to these problems by diving deep into the

acts regarding what happened a — ter October 7.

Administrators

irst issued public statements, o — ten — ramed to o —

er condolences and support — or students a —

ected by the con — lict.119 These statements — requently emphasized a commitment to dialogue, mutual respect, and peace, though the speci — icity and tone o —

these responses varied.120 Some universities explicitly condemned Hamas and the violence perpetrated against Israel, drawing clear lines against terrorism and aligning with global anti-terrorism sentiments.121 Others, however, took a more neutral stance, attempting to avoid political entanglement by condemning violence broadly without speci — ying any party.122 This more cautious approach was o — ten met with criticism, particularly — rom Jewish students and alumni, who viewed the neutral tone as a — ailure to su —

iciently condemn terrorism.123 Meanwhile, pro-Palestinian students — elt their voices were being marginalized, especially in institutions that — ocused solely on antisemitism without acknowledging the broader Israeli-Palestinian con — lict.124

118 See discussion in — ra Part IV.B. 119 Id. 120 Id. 121 Id. 122 Id. 123 See discussion in — ra Part IV.B. 124 Id. 40 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In terms o

protest management, many universities were con — ronted with a surge in activism, with student groups organizing rallies, sit-ins, and other demonstrations calling

or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel.125 The demand — or divestment was not new, but a — ter October 7, it gained signi — icant traction.126 Pro-Palestinian student groups, citing Israel’s military actions and long-standing occupation, pushed — or their universities to sever — inancial ties with companies that supplied weapons to Israel or that pro — ited — rom Israeli military actions in Gaza.127 In response, university administrations — aced the challenge o — balancing the right to protest with maintaining campus order and ensuring student sa — ety. Some administrations enacted stricter protest regulations, requiring prior approval — or demonstrations, limiting the time and place o — protests, and increasing security measures to prevent disruption.128

At institutions like Columbia University and Harvard, where divestment movements were particularly strong, university leaders navigated di —

icult waters. 129 They were pressed — rom pro-Israel advocates, including alumni and donors, to not engage in any divestment actions, which they argued would politicize the university and harm Jewish students. 130 In contrast, pro-Palestinian groups viewed the re — usal to divest as complicity in Israel’s actions, accusing the universities o — prioritizing — inancial interests over human rights. 131 Some administrations chose to publicly rea —

irm their commitment to maintaining their endowment investments, arguing that endowments are — inancial instruments meant to ensure the sustainability o — the institution rather than political tools. 132 Many university leaders pointed out that divestment — rom Israel could expose the university to legal risks, especially in states where anti-boycott laws have been enacted.133

The pressure on university administrations extended beyond protests themselves, as alumni, donors, and the media scrutinized institutional responses. 134 At several universities, major donors publicly threatened to withdraw — inancial support i — the university did not take a stronger stance against antisemitism or re — used to condemn pro- Palestinian student groups.135 In some cases, this led to a delicate balancing act where universities attempted to distance themselves — rom the political implications o — student

125 Id. 126 Id. 127 Id. 128 See source and accompanying text in — ra note 76. 129 See discussions in — ra Part IV.B.1 and Part IV.B.4. 130 See discussion in — ra Part IV.B. 131 Id. 132 Id. 133 Id. 134 Id. 135 See discussion in — ra Part IV.B. 41 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

protests while upholding their commitments to

ree speech. 136 Simultaneously, they had to contend with legal and policy challenges, as private universities — aced — ewer First Amendment constraints than public institutions but still navigated a mine — ield o — internal policies around speech and assembly.137

  A. The Spark: October 7, 2023 On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched an unprecedented and highly coordinated attack on Israel, which rapidly escalated into one o ---  the deadliest days in the history o ---  the Israeli- Palestinian con --- lict. The core  --- acts o ---  the event are largely undisputed: Hamas militants in --- iltrated Israeli territory, attacking civilian communities, military installations, and gathering places such as the Nova Music Festival. 138 The assault involved the  --- iring o ---  over 5,000 rockets into Israel, ground incursions that overwhelmed Israeli de --- ense systems, and the kidnapping o ---  hundreds o ---  Israeli civilians, including women, children, and elderly individuals.139 Initial reports estimated that over 1,200 Israeli citizens were killed in the attacks, with many more injured or displaced.140 While widely condemned as an unprecedented act o ---  violence by Hamas, others  --- rame the assault as part o ---  an ongoing struggle against occupation.141

As Hamas militants swept through border towns and communities like Kibbutz Nir Oz and K — ar Aza, they engaged in indiscriminate killings, leading to horri — ic scenes o — violence. Hostages were taken back to Gaza, — urther ampli — ying the shock and anger across Israel and the international community.142 Videos o — these kidnappings, circulated by Hamas, were used as propaganda to celebrate the success o — the operation, but they also ignited a global wave o — sympathy — or Israel and condemnation o — the actions as terrorism.

However, despite the clear

acts about the scale and nature o — the attack, the way these events were — ramed diverged sharply between di —

erent groups and narratives. In Israel and much o — the Western world, the attacks were characterized as an act o — terror that violated

136 Id. 137 Id. 138 Tim Flack, How Did the World Respond to the October 7th Massacre? THE JERUSALEM POST (Apr. 3, 2024), https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-795152. 139 Abbas Al Lawati & Nadeen Ebrahim, Israel Is at War with Hamas. Here’s What to Know., CNN (Oct. 15, 2023), https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/09/middleeast/israel-hamas-gaza-war-explained-mime-intl. 140 See id. (reporting 1,400 people killed). 141 See, e.g., Maureen Tkacik, What Really Happened on October 7? AMERICAN PROSPECT (Mar. 20, 2024), https://prospect.org/world/2024-03-20-what-really-happened-on-october-7/; See also Hussein Ibish, History Didn’t Begin on October 7th, IN THESE TIMES (Dec. 5, 2023), https://inthesetimes.com/article/israel- occupation-palestine-settlers-apartheid-checkpoints-resistance. 142 Hamas Hostages: Stories o — the People Taken — rom Israel, BBC (Sept. 1, 2024, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67053011 (reporting 251 hostages taken on October 7, with 101 remaining, two o — whom were taken prior to the October 7th attack, in 2014 and 2015 respectively) 42 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

international norms and warranted a

orce — ul military response. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Hamas had declared war on Israeli civilians and emphasized that these acts were designed to in — lict maximum terror on non-combatants. The Israeli government quickly initiated Operation Iron Swords, a — ull-scale military campaign aimed at dismantling Hamas’ military in — rastructure in Gaza.143

From this perspective, the Hamas assault was

ramed as part o — a broader global — ight against terrorism, justi — ying Israel’s retaliatory strikes and blockades o — Gaza. Western leaders, including U.S. President Joe Biden, expressed strong support — or Israel, reiterating that it had the right to de — end itsel — in the — ace o — such extreme aggression. 144 In this narrative, the central — ocus remained on the civilian casualties and the humanitarian cost in — licted by Hamas’ actions.

In contrast, many pro-Palestinian groups and supporters o

the Palestinian cause — ramed the events o — October 7th di —

erently. In their view, the Hamas operation was portrayed as a response to decades o — Israeli occupation, blockades, and human rights violations against Palestinians living in Gaza and the West Bank.145 While the scale o — violence was acknowledged, these groups emphasized that the context o — the attacks could not be separated — rom the broader struggle — or Palestinian sel — -determination.146 According to this

raming, the assault was seen as part o — a legitimate resistance movement against Israeli policies that had le — t Gaza isolated and impoverished — or years.

Some Palestinian supporters pointed to Israel’s military operations in Gaza, the blockade, and the ongoing expansion o — settlements as driving — orces behind the escalation. 147 They argued that the civilian deaths on October 7th, while tragic, were a byproduct o — a long- standing con — lict in which Palestinians had been systematically oppressed and — orced into desperate measures.148 This narrative was picked up by many international activists, particularly on university campuses, where student groups organized rallies and protests condemning Israel’s military response as disproportionate.149

143 See Al Lawati supra note 62. 144 Myah Ward & Craig Howie, “Rock Solid and Unwavering”: Biden Pledges Support — or Israel A — ter Hamas Attacks, POLITICO (Oct. 7, 2023), https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/07/hamas-terrorism-attacks-on- israeli-civilians-00120480. 145 See sources supra note 84. 146 See id. 147 See Mariam Barghouti, On October 7, Gaza Broke Out o — Prison, AL JAZEERA (Oct. 14, 2023), https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/10/14/on-october-7-gaza-broke-out-o — -prison (discussing the wall enclosing Gaza and its destruction on October 7). 148 See sources supra note 84. 149 See discussion in — ra Part IV.B. 43 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

The divide between these two

ramings led to a global polarization o — opinion, with many seeing Hamas’ actions as unjusti — iable acts o — terror, while others viewed them as part o —

an ongoing con

lict that required a broader conversation about Palestinian rights and the end o — Israeli occupation. This divergence in interpretation, particularly around questions o — proportionality and resistance, — ed directly into the responses seen on university campuses in the — ollowing days.

The events o

October 7 thus set the stage — or a wave o — protests, statements, and divestment campaigns that swept across academic institutions. As we will explore in subsequent sections, the reactions to this attack — particularly on U.S. university campuses — illustrate how deeply divided the global community remains on issues o —

Israel, Palestine, and the ethics o

university engagement with geopolitical con — licts. This section serves as the backdrop — or understanding why the calls — or university disentanglement, particularly around divestment — rom Israeli companies and institutions, have taken on a new level o — intensity and controversy.

B. The Powder: University Responses to October 7 Following the devastating Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, universities across the United States — aced unprecedented challenges in responding to the un — olding events. As the violence shocked the world, the academic sphere was not immune to the tensions. University administrations, — aculty, and students — ound themselves thrust into the broader political and moral debates surrounding the attacks, with many institutions struggling to balance academic — reedom, — ree speech, and the moral implications o — the violence.

The response

rom universities was marked by a mix o — delayed condemnations, calls — or peace, and, in some cases, the explicit avoidance o — directly addressing the nature o — the attacks. These responses sparked outrage among donors, students, and — aculty members, many o — whom — elt the silence or vague condemnations were inadequate in the — ace o —

what they saw as acts o

terrorism. On several campuses, the initial administrative statement in response was overshadowed by student protests, — aculty statements, and increased activism on both sides o — the issue, with calls — or boycotts, divestments, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel gaining momentum.

In many cases, pro-Palestinian student groups seized on the moment to

rame the events as part o — a broader struggle — or Palestinian rights, leading to accusations that universities were tacitly endorsing or allowing antisemitic rhetoric on campus. Conversely, pro-Israel students and — aculty demanded stronger moral leadership — rom university administrations, insisting that the attacks needed to be condemned as terrorism, and any rhetoric justi — ying Hamas’ actions should be treated as hate speech.

                                      44 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Amid this

raught atmosphere, university leaders were caught between protecting — ree speech and addressing the demands — or moral clarity. This section will explore the speci — ic responses — rom various universities, the protests that — ollowed, and the tensions that arose as university administrations sought to navigate this complex and politically charged environment. Through twelve case studies, we will examine how these institutions responded, how their actions were perceived, and what the broader implications were — or the role o — universities in moments o — global crisis.

We will now delve into detailed examples

rom institutions that — aced signi — icant controversy and public scrutiny, examining both their administrative responses and the broader campus climate. These case studies highlight the unique challenges universities

ace when navigating the intersection o —

ree speech, academic — reedom, and moral responsibility.

   1. Harvard University

Harvard University,

ounded in 1636, is the oldest institution o — higher learning in the United States. Its long history and signi — icant endowment have enabled it to become a leading research university, o —

ering a broad range o — academic programs. Harvard’s contributions to scholarship span multiple disciplines, — rom the humanities and social sciences to the natural sciences and technology. Its — aculty and alumni include numerous notable — igures who have played in — luential roles in government, business, and academia.

Harvard has also been involved in various socio-political events throughout its history. During the Vietnam War, the university became a — ocal point — or both student activism and institutional responses to the con — lict. Similarly, during the 1980s, Harvard took a public stance on apartheid in South A — rica by engaging in divestment actions, responding to calls

rom students and — aculty — or greater social responsibility. These actions re — lected the university’s position as an institution with both academic and societal in — luence.

In addition to its academic contributions, Harvard has played a signi

icant role in producing graduates who occupy leadership positions in many — ields. Its alumni network includes multiple U.S. presidents, Supreme Court justices, and leaders in business and global governance. The university’s prominence o — ten places it at the center o — public discourse, with its actions and positions on social and political issues being closely scrutinized.

In recent years, Harvard has responded to various contemporary global challenges, including climate change and social justice movements. The university has initiated sustainability programs aimed at reducing its carbon — ootprint and has launched initiatives to promote diversity and inclusion across its campus. Harvard’s approach to these issues

                                      45 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

re

lects its broader role in addressing both academic and societal concerns, maintaining its status as a prominent institution in global higher education.

        a. Harvard’s Initial Administrative Statement

Harvard University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7, 2023, came — rom President Claudine Gay.150 In her — irst statement, issued soon a — ter the attack, Gay expressed sorrow over the violence and extended support to students a —

ected by the con — lict.151 The tone o — the statement was measured and neutral, — ocusing on the need — or community unity and mutual respect rather than condemning any speci — ic actors.152 She emphasized Harvard’s role as an academic institution committed to — ree expression and open dialogue.153 Gay’s statement acknowledged the complex emotions within the community and highlighted the resources available — or students needing support but avoided any speci — ic political stance. 154

Following the initial communication, additional statements were made by university o —

icials, which echoed the same neutral tone. Harvard’s administration — ocused on ensuring the sa — ety o — its students and providing mental health resources, rea —

irming its commitment to — ostering an environment o — empathy, understanding, and thought — ul dialogue. The timing o — the statements was criticized — or being delayed, as they were not released immediately a — ter the attack, but rather a — ter internal deliberation on how to approach the highly sensitive topic without in — laming tensions.155

No immediate policy changes or actions were taken in response to the situation, aside

rom rein — orcing the university’s commitment to sa — ety and providing spaces — or re — lection and support within the community. These initial steps set the stage — or Harvard’s administrative stance in the days — ollowing the attack.

        b. Harvard Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, Harvard University became a central hub — or pro- Palestinian student protests calling — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel.

150 Maggie Hicks, Here’s What Colleges Are, and Aren’t, Saying about the Israel-Hamas War, THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION (Oct. 2023), https://www.chronicle.com/article/heres-what-colleges-are-and-arent- saying-about-the-israel-hamas-war 151 See Statement By President Gay, HARVARD OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (Oct. 9, 2023), https://www.harvard.edu/president/news-gay/2023/war-in-the-middle-east/. 152 See id. 153 See id. 154 See id. 155 See, e.g., Alex Chou & Ayumi Nagatomi, Israeli Harvard Alumni Slam University Over Response to Hamas Attack, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (Oct. 20, 2023), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/10/20/israel- harvard-alumni-backlash/. 46 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Organized by groups such as the Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) and other student- led organizations, these protests demanded that Harvard disclose its — inancial ties and divest — rom institutions supporting the “Israeli occupation.”156 A signi — icant rally in the Science Center Plaza drew over 150 students, where activists called — or Harvard to sever its academic and — inancial links to Israel.157 Protesters also pressured university administrators by organizing marches and delivering speeches, urging transparency in investments and academic partnerships with Israeli institutions.158

In addition to grassroots rallies, Harvard’s student government was involved in pushing

or divestment. A petition circulated by the PSC led to a re — erendum, asking undergraduates to vote on whether Harvard should divest — rom companies tied to Israel.159 The petition quickly gathered the necessary signatures, and the re — erendum was set to take place within a — ew weeks.160 However, Harvard’s administration, including the Harvard Management Company, made it clear that it opposed calls — or divestment, reiterating that boycotting Israel and its academic institutions did not align with university policies. 161

Throughout the protests, Harvard maintained its position on upholding

ree speech while regulating protest activities to ensure campus sa — ety and compliance with university guidelines.162 University spokespersons declined to comment directly on the criticisms, but senior administrators, including interim President Alan Garber, reminded students about protest policies through — ormal communications.163 This tension between student activism and administrative resistance continues to shape the debate on divestment and university governance at Harvard.

156 Sally E. Edwards & Joyce E. Kim, Pro-Palestine Groups Rally, Demand Harvard Divest Ties to Israel, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (Feb. 9, 2024), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/2/9/protest-harvard-divest- israel/. 157 Id. 158 Edwards & Kim, supra note 132 159 Cam N. Srivastava & William Y. Tan, Harvard Student Government Approves PSC Petition — or Re — erendum on Israel Investment, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (Apr. 10, 2024), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/10/divestment-petition-israel-palestine/. 160 Id. 161 Id. (“A University statement released last week said that ‘Harvard leadership has made clear that it opposes calls — or a policy o — boycotting Israel and its academic institutions.’”). 162 Edwards & Kim, supra note 132; see also Janet Lorin, Eliyahu Kamisher & Katia Porcekanski, Harvard, Columbia Say No to Students Demanding Israel Divestment, STARS AND STRIPES (Apr. 26, 2024), https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2024-04-26/harvard-columbia-students-divest-israel-13667375.html (discussing the e —

orts by universities to balance the need — or campus sa — ety with the goal o — promoting — ree expression and open discourse). 163 Id.

                                             47 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

        c. Analysis o ---  Harvard’s (Dis)Entanglement

Harvard University’s response to the protests and calls

or divestment — ollowing the events o — October 7 drew signi — icant national attention and sparked controversy, particularly in

ederal and state governments, the media, and public intellectual circles. Criticism o —

Harvard’s response

ocused primarily on what many saw as a tepid initial reaction — rom the administration, exacerbated by subsequent events, including Harvard President Claudine Gay’s appearance at a congressional hearing on antisemitism.164

Harvard initially

aced backlash — or its neutral stance and perceived — ailure to strongly condemn pro-Palestinian student groups that blamed Israel — or the violence. 165 This criticism reached a boiling point when President Gay, alongside the presidents o — MIT and the University o — Pennsylvania, appeared be — ore Congress on December 5, 2023.166 During the hearing, Gay’s responses to questions about — ree speech and antisemitism were widely viewed as evasive.167 She and the other university leaders declined to de — initively state whether calls — or genocide against Jews violated their university’s codes o — conduct, prompting bipartisan condemnation — rom lawmakers, including Harvard alumni. 168

The media, particularly outlets like The Boston Globe169 and Politico,170 extensively covered Gay’s testimony and the subsequent — allout. Prominent public — igures, including donors like Bill Ackman, openly criticized Harvard’s handling o — the situation, with some

164 Andrew Silow-Carroll, Many Jews Criticized Harvard’s Oct. 7 Response. Fewer Are Applauding President Claudine Gay’s Resignation., JEWISH TELEGRAPHIC AGENCY (Jan. 5, 2024 1:42 PM), https://www.jta.org/2024/01/05/united-states/many-jews-criticized-harvards-oct-7-response- — ewer-are- applauding-president-claudine-gays-resignation; Harvard University President Claudine Gay Resigns, NPR (Jan 2, 2024 3:11 PM). https://www.npr.org/2024/01/02/1222516898/harvard-university-president-claudine- gay-resigns. 165 Emma H. Haidar, et al., Harvard’s Gi — t O —

icers Are Worried About Backlash Over the School’s Israel- Hamas Response. Here’s Why., THE CRIMSON (Nov. 29, 2023 11:24 AM), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/11/29/donor-backlash-israel-hamas-response/. 166 Harvard University President Claudine Gay Resigns, NPR (Jan 2, 2024 3:11 PM). https://www.npr.org/2024/01/02/1222516898/harvard-university-president-claudine-gay-resigns. 167 Andrew Silow-Carroll, Many Jews Criticized Harvard’s Oct. 7 Response. Fewer Are Applauding President Claudine Gay’s Resignation., JEWISH TELEGRAPHIC AGENCY (Jan. 5, 2024 1:42 PM), https://www.jta.org/2024/01/05/united-states/many-jews-criticized-harvards-oct-7-response- — ewer-are- applauding-president-claudine-gays-resignation (noting the “lawyerly” answers o —

ered by President Gay). 168 Miles J. Herszenhorn & Claire Yuan, ‘I am Sorry’: President Claudine Gay Addresses Backlash Over Congressional Testimony on Antisemitism, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (Dec. 8, 2023), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/12/8/gay-apology-congressional- remarks/?re — =stan — ordreview.org. 169 See, e.g., Mike Damiano and Hilary Burns, Harvard University Claudine Gay Resigns, THE BOSTON GLOBE (Jan. 2, 2024), https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/01/02/metro/claudine-gay-resignation/. 170 See, e.g., Eric Bazail-Eimil, et al., Claudine Gay, First Black Woman President at Harvard, to Resign, POLITICO (Jan 2, 2024 5:44 PM), https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/02/harvard-claudine-gay-resign- 00133459. 48 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

threatening to withdraw donations i

the university did not take stronger action to protect Jewish students.171 While Gay — aced signi — icant criticism, some within academic circles de — ended her cautious approach as a re — lection o — the complexity o — balancing — ree speech with institutional neutrality.172 In the wake o — these events, Harvard — aced ongoing congressional scrutiny and was called to submit documentation regarding its response to antisemitism on campus.173

The

allout — rom this situation ultimately led to Claudine Gay’s resignation on January 2, 2024, marking the end o — her brie — tenure as Harvard’s president.174 Her resignation was welcomed by some Jewish students and donors, who had been calling — or greater accountability, while others, including A — rican American intellectuals like Cornel West, criticized her departure as being the result o — undue pressure — rom power — ul pro-Israel

orces.175 Gay’s resignation highlighted the intersection o — race, politics, and — ree speech issues at Harvard, complicating the narrative surrounding her leadership and the university’s handling o — the October 7 protests.176

Harvard’s actions, including Gay’s eventual resignation, were part o

a broader reckoning with how U.S. universities handle issues o —

ree speech, antisemitism, and political activism on campus, and they continue to reverberate both in the academic world and beyond.

        2. University o ---  Pennsylvania

The University o

Pennsylvania (Penn), — ounded in 1740, is among the oldest higher education institutions in the United States. Established with a vision to blend practical and theoretical education, Penn became a pioneer in developing pro — essional schools, such as the Wharton School o — Business in 1881, the — irst o — its kind. The university’s in — luence

171 Emma H. Haidar, et al., Harvard’s Gi — t O —

icers Are Worried About Backlash Over the School’s Israel- Hamas Response. Here’s Why., THE CRIMSON (Nov. 29, 2023 11:24 AM), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/11/29/donor-backlash-israel-hamas-response/. 172 Peter Pressman, Opinion: In De — ense o — Claudine Gay and Academic Freedom, PORTLAND PRESS HERALD (Jan. 7, 2024), https://www.pressherald.com/2024/01/07/opinion-in-de — ense-o — -claudine-gay-and- academic- — reedom/ (“three accomplished scholars and university presidents, including President Gay, — ell into the trap o — theoretically and intellectually trying to underscore the sanctity o —

ree speech on campus.”). 173 Miles J. Herszenhorn & Claire Yuan, Congress Opens Investigation Into Harvard Over Antisemitism on Campus, THE HARVARD CRIMSON (Dec. 8, 2023), https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/12/8/congress-investigation- harvard/. 174 Andrew Silow-Carroll, Many Jews Criticized Harvard’s Oct. 7 Response. Fewer Are Applauding President Claudine Gay’s Resignation., JEWISH TELEGRAPHIC AGENCY (Jan. 5, 2024 1:42 PM), https://www.jta.org/2024/01/05/united-states/many-jews-criticized-harvards-oct-7-response- — ewer-are- applauding-president-claudine-gays-resignation. 175 Id. 176 See id. (exploring the dialogue between various parties — ollowing President Gay’s initial administrative response — ollowing Oct. 7 which in many cases centered around racial identity). 49 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

extends across a wide range o

disciplines, including law, medicine, and business, shaping academic and pro — essional standards in the U.S. and internationally. Its interdisciplinary approach, emphasizing both liberal arts and practical skills, has set a model that many other institutions have — ollowed.

Penn has played an active role in various socio-political movements over time. During the Civil Rights Movement, the university became a hub — or activism, with students and — aculty supporting e —

orts — or racial equality through protests and organizing. In the 1980s, Penn’s decision to divest — rom companies involved in apartheid South A — rica re — lected its broader engagement with global justice issues. The university also witnessed signi — icant anti-war protests during the Vietnam War, aligning with the broader national discourse around U.S.

oreign policy and military actions.

In recent years, Penn has been involved in addressing contemporary socio-political challenges, particularly through its response to the Black Lives Matter movement. Following the 2020 protests against systemic racism, Penn launched initiatives aimed at increasing diversity and equity within its own community. The Task Force on Support — or Faculty o — Color and the Penn Medicine and University Health System’s work on addressing racial health disparities are examples o — how the university is responding to social justice movements. Additionally, Penn’s sustainability initiatives, including its commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2042, re — lect its engagement with global environmental issues.

As a prominent academic institution, Penn continues to contribute to both intellectual discourse and societal change. Its — aculty, students, and alumni are actively involved in addressing pressing issues like climate change, economic inequality, and healthcare access. Through these e —

orts, Penn demonstrates its ongoing commitment to addressing not only historical socio-political concerns but also the evolving challenges o —

contemporary society.

        a. Penn’s Initial Administrative Statements

The University o

Pennsylvania’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o — October 7 was delivered by President Liz Magill. In her o —

icial statement, Magill expressed deep sorrow over the violence in Israel and Gaza, o —

ering support to those a —

ected within the university community.177 The tone o — her message was compassionate,

177 See Liz Magill & John L. Jackson, Jr., War in the Middle East, PENN TODAY (Oct. 10, 2023), https://penntoday.upenn.edu/announcements/war-middle-east; A Message From President Liz Magill on the Terrorist Attacks in Israel, PENN TODAY (Oct. 15, 2023), https://penntoday.upenn.edu/announcements/penns- response-recent-events-terrorist-attacks-in-israel. 50 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

ocusing on the need — or campus unity during a time o — global con — lict.178 Magill emphasized that Penn is a place — or open dialogue and respect — ul engagement with di —

icult topics.179 The statement rea —

irmed the university’s commitment to ensuring the sa — ety and well-being o — all students, without taking a partisan stance on the con — lict itsel — .

In addition to o

ering emotional and mental health resources — or students, the administration highlighted existing structures to report any incidents o — hate or discrimination that might arise in the a — termath o — the violence.180 No signi — icant policy changes were announced at this stage, but the administration did stress the importance o —

ostering a respect — ul environment where diverse perspectives could be shared constructively.181 The timing o — the statement was relatively swi — t, appearing soon a — ter the events un — olded, as the university sought to address growing concerns on campus and maintain a sense o — community during an increasingly polarized global situation.

        b. Penn Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, signi — icant student activism emerged at the University o —

Pennsylvania, particularly calling

or divestment — rom companies linked to Israel.182 Pro- Palestinian groups, such as those organizing the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment,”183 demanded that the university disclose its — inancial ties and divest — rom companies pro — iting — rom the con — lict.184 Penn’s administration, led by interim president Dr. J. Larry Jameson, resisted calls — or divestment but upheld the university’s commitment to — ree speech while also addressing concerns about sa — ety and campus policy.185

The university took measures to regulate protests, highlighting violations o

campus policies, particularly regarding the encampment that had been set up on College Green. 186 While Jameson expressed support — or open dialogue, he also emphasized that the encampment violated university rules, which led to police intervention and the eventual

178 See Id. 179 See id. 180 See id. 181 See id. 182 Meir Rinde, No Disruptions and Few Signs o — Protest at University o — Pennsylvania’s Commencement, BILLYPENN (May 20, 2024), https://billypenn.com/2024/05/20/university-o — -pennsylvania-commencement-no- protests/. 183 Diamy Wang, The Graduation Issue 2024: Penn’s Gaza Solidarity Encampment, From Beginning to End, THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN (May 16, 2024), https://www.thedp.com/article/2024/05/penn-gaza-solidarity- encampment-recap. 184 Ella Sohn, A Look at the Pro-Palestine Encampment’s Demands: Penn’s Process Governing Disclosure and Divestment, THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN (Apr. 28, 2024), https://www.thedp.com/article/2024/04/penn- divestment-endowment-explainer. 185 Id. 186 Id. 51 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

removal o

the encampment.187 Penn continued to balance its stance on — ree speech with campus sa — ety, but its re — usal to adopt divestment measures remained — irm amid growing student activism.188

         c. Analysis o ---  Penn’s (Dis)Entanglement

The University o

Pennsylvania (UPenn) — aced extensive national scrutiny — ollowing its response to student protests and calls — or divestment a — ter the events o — October 7, 2023. President Liz Magill became a — ocal point — or criticism, particularly — ollowing her testimony be — ore Congress on December 5, 2023. During this hearing, Magill, along with the presidents o — Harvard and MIT, was questioned about antisemitism on campus. 189 Her response to a question — rom Rep. Elise Ste — anik (R-N.Y.)—whether calls — or genocide against Jews constituted harassment under Penn’s code o — conduct—sparked outrage.190 Magill’s statement that it “depended on the context” was widely condemned by both Democrats and Republicans, including Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, who called her comments “shame — ul” and lacking in moral clarity.191

In the a

termath o — the congressional hearing, Penn’s Board o — Trustees convened multiple emergency meetings to address the growing calls — or leadership changes.192 High-pro — ile donors, including Jon Huntsman Jr., withdrew — inancial support, stating that Magill’s leadership had damaged the university’s reputation.193 Republican lawmakers — rom Pennsylvania sent a — ormal letter demanding her resignation, citing her — ailure to adequately address antisemitism on campus.194

187 Id. 188 Neema Baddam & Katie Bartlett, Penn Rebu —

s Student Re — erendum Vote in Favor o — Divestment From Israel, THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN (June 27, 2024), https://www.thedp.com/article/2024/06/penn-muslim- student-association-re — erendum-vote. 189 Michael Tanenbaum, Penn President Liz Magill Responds to Backlash A — ter Tense Congressional Hearing on Antisemitism, PHILLY VOICE (Dec. 7, 2023), https://www.phillyvoice.com/penn-liz-magill-antisemitism- hearing-genocide-jewish-people-israel-gaza/. 190 Id. 191 Id. 192 Jonah Miller, et al., Live Updates: All the Events Leading Up to Penn President Liz Magill’s Resignation, THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN (Dec. 7, 2023), https://www.thedp.com/article/2023/12/penn-magill-resign-hearing- trustees 193 Jared Mitovich, et al., Huntsman Family, Longtime Penn Supporters, Will Halt Donations to ‘Unrecognizable’ University, THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN (Oct. 15, 2023), https://www.thedp.com/article/2023/10/penn-jon-huntsman-jr-wharton-halts-donations-magill. 194 Id. 52 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

On December 9, 2023, Magill resigned as Penn’s president, a move that many saw as inevitable given the mounting pressure — rom both political — igures and major donors. 195 Scott Bok, Chair o — Penn’s Board o — Trustees, also resigned shortly therea — ter.196 This leadership turnover underscored the serious — allout — rom the university’s perceived mishandling o — the protests and the subsequent congressional oversight into campus antisemitism and — ree speech issues.

The national response to Penn’s actions highlighted the deep divide between advocating

or — ree speech and ensuring campus sa — ety, particularly in the context o — antisemitism and the Israel-Palestine con — lict. Penn’s ongoing challenges, including legal action — rom Jewish students and an investigation by the U.S. Department o — Education, illustrate the long-term implications o — this crisis.

    3. University o ---  Chicago

The University o

Chicago, — ounded in 1890 by John D. Rocke — eller, has been a major — orce in American higher education, renowned — or its emphasis on rigorous academic inquiry and intellectual — reedom. From its inception, the university sought to cultivate a climate o —

open debate and academic rigor, and its commitment to interdisciplinary research has produced signi — icant contributions to — ields ranging — rom economics to physics. The Chicago School o — Economics, — or instance, became — amous — or its neoliberal theories, which have shaped global economic policies — or decades. The university’s contributions to the Manhattan Project during World War II also cemented its role in global scienti — ic and political developments, in — luencing the trajectory o — the 20th century.

In addition to its academic achievements, the University o

Chicago has played an important role in shaping socio-political discourse. During the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War, the campus was a center — or activism and debate, much like other prestigious institutions at the time. However, it is the university’s strong de — ense o —

ree speech, codi — ied in the “Chicago Principles,” that has distinguished it in the realm o — socio- political a —

airs.197 The Chicago Principles, adopted in 2014, are a set o — guidelines a —

irming the university’s commitment to — ree expression.198 The principles assert that debate and dissent, even on controversial and divisive issues, are essential to the academic mission.

195 Lauren Markoe, University o — Pennsylvania President Resigns A — ter Widely-Panned Remarks About Jewish Genocide, FORWARD (Dec. 9, 2023), https:// — orward.com/ — ast- — orward/572966/liz-magill-university- pennsylvania-president-resigns-jewish-genocide-remarks-congress/. 196 Lauren Markoe, University o — Pennsylvania President Resigns A — ter Widely-Panned Remarks About Anti- Semitism, FORWARD (Dec. 9, 2023), https:// — orward.com/ — ast- — orward/572966/liz-magill-university- pennsylvania-president-resigns-jewish-genocide-remarks-congress/. 197 See Free Expression, UNIV. CHICAGO, https:// — reeexpression.uchicago.edu (last visited Sept. 15, 2024). 198 See id. 53 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

This policy has since become a model

or other institutions, rein — orcing the university’s stance that intellectual engagement must not be sti — led, regardless o — the discom — ort it may cause.

The university’s in

luence on global a —

airs is evident in its production o — scholars, policymakers, and activists who have shaped the political landscape. Notable alumni include Nobel laureates such as Milton Friedman and Barack Obama, both o — whom have had a pro — ound impact on global economic and political thought. The Chicago School’s

ocus on — ree-market policies continues to shape international economic practices, while the university’s political science and law programs have in — luenced discussions on governance and constitutionalism around the world.

In recent years, the University o

Chicago has maintained its leadership in intellectual and moral debates by standing — irm on its — ree speech policies, even amid growing tensions around political correctness and campus activism. As global issues such as — ree speech, climate change, and social justice dominate public discourse, the University o — Chicago remains a beacon — or those advocating — or intellectual — reedom and the un — linching pursuit o — truth. The Chicago Principles continue to guide the university’s response to contemporary challenges, rein — orcing its position as a champion o — open debate and academic integrity in a complex global landscape.

        a. Chicago’s Initial Administrative Statement

The University o

Chicago’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o —

October 7 adhered closely to its longstanding principles o

ree expression. University President Paul Alivisatos did not issue a politically charged statement, instead rein — orcing the institution’s commitment to — ree speech and open dialogue. The o —

icial response, which came shortly a — ter the attacks, emphasized the university’s dedication to allowing a wide range o — views to be expressed on campus, consistent with the “Chicago Principles” that prioritize academic — reedom.199 The tone o — the statement was neutral, with a — ocus on creating an environment conducive to respect — ul discourse. 200 The university also reminded the campus community o — the resources available — or students a —

ected by the events and reiterated its commitment to the sa — ety and well-being o — all students.201

199 See News Announcement, Support — or the University Community, THE UNIV. CHICAGO CAMPUS & STUDENT LIFE (Oct. 9, 2023), https://csl.uchicago.edu/news/article/support- — or-the-university-community-israel/. 200 See id. 201 See id. 54 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

        b. Chicago Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, signi — icant student activism erupted at the University o —

Chicago.202 These protests, which included daily demonstrations on the campus quad, speci — ically called — or the university to divest — rom companies linked to Israel, particularly weapons manu — acturers that allegedly supported Israeli military actions.203 Protesters drew attention to the university’s investments in companies like General Dynamics and criticized the administration — or its — inancial ties to corporations they associated with the con — lict in Gaza.204

The protesters set up an encampment on the main quad as a

orm o — direct action, demanding both divestment and greater transparency regarding the university’s investments.205 While the administration initially allowed the encampment to proceed under the banner o —

ree expression,206 it eventually ordered the removal o — the encampment, citing violations o — campus policies. 207 University President Paul Alivisatos underscored the importance o —

ree speech but highlighted that such activities needed to comply with university regulations.208

Despite the university’s stated commitment to neutrality—grounded in its historical “Kalven Report,” which emphasizes institutional neutrality on political issues 209—the student activists argued that investments in Israeli military contractors were inherently political and con — licted with the university’s stated values o — human rights.210 Counterprotests also took place, with students carrying Israeli — lags con — ronting the

202 Peter Maheras, et al., Pro-Palestine Protesters Hold Quad Rally and March Through Campus, THE CHICAGO MAROON (Apr. 26, 2024), https://chicagomaroon.com/42179/news/pro-palestine-protesters-hold-quad-rally- and-march-through-campus/. 203 Id. 204 Id. 205 See Mary Norkol, University o — Chicago Pro-Palestinian Encampment Cleared by Police, CHICAGO SUN- TIMES (May 7, 2024), https://chicago.suntimes.com/israel-hamas-war/2024/05/07/pro-palestinian- encampment-university-o — -chicago-tear-down; see also Paul Alivisatos, Concerning the Encampment, UNIV. CHICAGO OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, https://president.uchicago.edu/en/ — rom-the-president/messages/240429- concerning-the-encampment. 206 Alivisatos, supra note 181. 207 Paul Alivisatos, Ending the Encampment, UNIV. CHICAGO OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, https://president.uchicago.edu/en/ — rom-the-president/messages/2405207-ending-the-encampment. 208 Id. 209 Kalven Committee, Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action, UNIV. CHICAGO OFFICE OF THE PROVOST (Nov. 11, 1967), https://provost.uchicago.edu/sites/de — ault/ — iles/documents/reports/KalvenRprt_0.pd — . 210 Kevin Hu, Chicago Students Join National Wave o — Pro-Palestine University Protests, SOUTH SIDE WEEKLY (Dec. 7, 2023), https://southsideweekly.com/chicago-students-join-national-wave-o — -pro-palestine- university-protests/. 55 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

demonstrators, although these interactions remained largely peace

ul with university police ensuring that tensions did not escalate — urther. 211

        c. Analysis o ---  Chicago’s (Dis)Entanglement

The University o

Chicago’s response to the post-October 7 protests, was met with mixed reactions — rom both the public and media. The protests, which included an encampment on the main campus quad, called — or the university to divest — rom companies linked to Israel, such as General Dynamics and Boeing.212 Protesters highlighted UChicago’s

inancial ties to de — ense contractors, accusing the university o — being complicit in the violence in Gaza.213

The administration, led by President Paul Alivisatos, maintained its long-standing commitment to — ree speech, allowing protests to continue within campus guidelines but dismantling the encampment a — ter nine days, citing university regulations. 214 While the administration emphasized the need — or dialogue, critics, including protestors, argued that the university’s — inancial ties to companies involved in the con — lict contradicted its claim to neutrality.215

The national response to UChicago’s handling o

the protests re — lected broader debates about university investment policies. Media outlets, including The Chicago Maroon, detailed the university’s re — usal to bow to calls — or divestment while upholding student protest rights.216 However, no signi — icant turnover or resignations resulted — rom the university’s response, contrasting with the — allout seen at other institutions like Harvard and UPenn. UChicago continues to — ace calls — or divestment, but its leadership has remained — irm in its stance against taking a political position through its investment strategies.

    4. Columbia University

Columbia University,

ounded in 1754 as King’s College, is one o — the oldest higher education institutions in the United States. 217 Located in New York City, it has played a

211 Violet Miller, et al., University o — Chicago O —

icials, Protestors Hit Impasse Over Pro-Palestinian Encampment, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES (May 3, 2024), https://chicago.suntimes.com/israel-hamas- war/2024/05/03/university-o — -chicago-o —

icials-pro-palestinian-protesters-encampment-impasse. 212 Maheras, supra note 178. 213 Id.; see also Hu, supra note 152 214 Maroon Sta —

, Police Raid Quad Encampment on Ninth Day, CHICAGO MAROON (May 7, 2024), https://chicagomaroon.com/43133/news/live-updates-pro-palestine-encampment-enters-ninth-day-on- quad/. 215 See Hu, supra note 186. 216 See, e.g., Maheras, supra note 178 217 History o — Columbia University, https://www.columbia.edu/content/university-history, (last visited Sept. 1, 2024). 56 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

signi

icant role in advancing research and scholarship in various academic disciplines. 218 Over its long history, Columbia has developed a reputation — or academic rigor and has contributed to — ields such as journalism, law, medicine, and international relations. 219 The university’s — aculty and alumni include a wide range o — notable — igures, including Nobel laureates, Supreme Court justices, and leaders in government and business.220

Columbia has also been involved in key socio-political events, particularly during the 1960s. The 1968 student protests, which — ocused on issues such as the university’s involvement in military research and plans to build a segregated gym in Morningside Park, brought national attention to questions o — civil rights and university governance. 221 These protests, which culminated in a weeks-long occupation o — campus buildings, marked a signi — icant moment in the broader student movement o — the time. Columbia’s history o —

engagement with social issues continues today, particularly through its School o

International and Public A

airs (SIPA), which has had a long-standing impact on global policy discussions.222

Columbia’s contributions to higher education are evident in its well-regarded graduate programs and research centers, which attract scholars — rom around the world. The university also administers the Pulitzer Prizes, — urthering its in — luence in the — ield o —

journalism.223 Columbia has traditionally supported academic

reedom, — ostering open debate on issues such as climate change, economic inequality, and international relations. Its research initiatives o — ten contribute to policy discussions on global challenges, such as healthcare access and environmental sustainability.

In response to contemporary global issues, Columbia has taken steps to address matters such as social justice and environmental responsibility. Following the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, the university announced several initiatives aimed at improving diversity and combating racial inequities.224 Additionally, Columbia remains involved in climate research and has made public commitments to sustainability.225 The university’s response

218 Id. 219 Id. 220 Id. 221 Id. 222 History o — Columbia University, https://www.columbia.edu/content/university-history, (last visited Sept. 1, 2024). 223 Seymour Topping, Sig Gissler, and Sean Murphy, History o — the Pulitzer Prizes, THE PULITZER PRIZES (last visited Sept. 1, 2024), https://www.pulitzer.org/page/history-pulitzer-prizes. 224 See, e.g., Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee’s Statement and Report on DEI-related Activities in Our Department Over the Past Year, COLUM. UNIV. DEPT. OF PSYCHOLOGY (last visited Sept. 1, 2024), https://psychology.columbia.edu/news/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-committees-statement-and-report- dei-related-activities-our. 225 Plan 2030, SUSTAINABLE COLUMBIA (last visited Aug. 30, 2024), https://sustainable.columbia.edu/content/plan-2030. 57 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

to these issues re

lects its ongoing e —

orts to engage with and address current socio- political challenges.

        a. Columbia’s Initial Administrative Statement

Columbia University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was delivered by President Minouche Sha — ik. In her statement, Sha — ik expressed deep concern — or the violence in Israel and Gaza, calling — or peace and re — lection.226 The tone o —

the message was measured,

ocusing on the need — or unity within the campus community while avoiding a direct political stance.227 Sha — ik emphasized the importance o —

ree expression and respect — or di —

ering viewpoints, stating that Columbia is committed to

ostering thought — ul dialogue during challenging times. 228 Immediate actions included ensuring that mental health resources were available — or students a —

ected by the con — lict, as well as rein — orcing sa — ety and support measures on campus.229

        b. Columbia Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, Columbia University became a — ocal point — or signi — icant student-led activism and protests, particularly advocating — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel.230 Organized by groups such as Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), students called — or the university to divest — rom companies they claimed were complicit in Israeli military actions, including McDonald’s, Airbnb, and Texaco.231 The protests intensi — ied when the Columbia College Student Council (CCSC) passed a resolution to boycott companies that supported Israel and initiated a re — erendum — or the entire student body to vote on university divestment.232 This re — erendum was expanded to

226 See Announcement, Columbia O —

ice o — the President, Message o — Concern — or Our Community (Oct. 9, 2023). https://president.columbia.edu/news/message-concern-our-community. 227 See id. 228 Id. 229 See id. 230 Daniel Henninger, The Cookie-Cutter Campus Protests: Anti-Israel Students, WALL STREET JOURNAL (Oct. 2023), https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cookie-cutter-campus-protests-anti-israel-students- dc — deb9b?st=7il2q5r3d648wbu&re — link=desktopwebshare_permalink. (exploring the protest activities at Columbia); Tawnell D. Hobbs, et. al., Student Campus Protests and Veteran Activist Groups, WALL STREET JOURNAL (Oct. 2023), https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/student-campus-protests-veteran-activist- groups-17ccd094?st=xjhlmq5my8lsgoc&re — link=desktopwebshare_permali.nk (exploring the extent o —

campus protests and the involvement o

le — t wing organizations at universities across the country, including Columbia). 231 Oscar Noxon & Noah Bernstein, CCSC Approves Re — erendum on Boycott — rom Israel, Adopts Boycott Strategy, COLUMBIA SPECTATOR (Mar. 4, 2024 12:45 PM), [hereina — ter CCSC Re — erendum] https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2024/03/04/ccsc-approves-re — erendum-on-divestment- — rom- israel-adopts-boycott-policy/. 232 Id. 58 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

include several other schools at Columbia, including Barnard College and the School o

General Studies.233

The demands o

these student groups included divesting all university — unds — rom companies pro — iting — rom Israel’s actions, canceling Columbia’s planned Tel Aviv Global Center, and ending the Dual Degree Program between Columbia University and Tel Aviv University.234 These actions were — ramed by student activists as part o — a broader movement to advocate — or Palestinian liberation and criticize the university’s — inancial ties to companies linked to Israel.235

Columbia University’s administration, led by President Minouche Sha

ik, did not concede to the demands — or divestment.236 Instead, the university reiterated its commitment to upholding — ree speech and allowing student expression within the bounds o — university policy.237 The protests, however, led to continued debates on campus about the university’s ethical responsibilities and involvement with Israel.

        c. Analysis o ---  Columbia’s (Dis)Entanglement

Columbia University’s handling o

the protests and calls — or divestment — ollowing the events o — October 7 has garnered signi — icant national attention and criticism. The protests, led by the group Columbia University Apartheid Divest and supported by various student organizations, centered around demands — or the university to sever its — inancial ties with companies linked to Israel.238 The protests, which included encampments on campus, culminated in con — rontations with university administration and law en — orcement.239

Columbia President Minouche Sha

ik — aced intense criticism — or authorizing the use o — New York Police Department (NYPD) o —

icers to dismantle a pro-Palestinian student

233 See Harriet Engelke, Columbia College Student Council Votes to Boycott Companies Supporting Israel And Pass a Divestment Re — erendum, Other Schools Follow Suit, BWOG (Mar. 5, 2024), https://bwog.com/2024/03/columbia-college-student-council-votes-to-boycott-companies-supporting- israel-and-pass-a-divestment-re — erendum-other-schools- — ollow-suit/. 234 See CCSC Re — erendum, supra note 207. 235 See id. 236 Matt Barnum & Juliet Chung, Protestors Are Demanding that Colleges Divest — rom Israel. Here’s Why That’s Not Happening. WALL STREET JOURNAL (Apr. 25, 2024), https://www.wsj.com/us-news/colleges-reject- divestment-demands-israel- — bb7a8 — c?mod=article_inline. 237 Statement, Columbia O —

ice o — the President, Statement From Columbia University President Minouche Sha — ik (Apr. 29, 2024), https://president.columbia.edu/news/statement-columbia-university-president- minouche-sha — ik-4-29. 238 See discussion supra Section IV.B.4.b 239 Melissa Korn & Douglas Belkin, Columbia University President Resigns, WALL STREET JOURNAL (Aug. 14, 2024 10:00 PM), https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/columbia-university-president-minouche-sha — ik- resigns- — 683cd80?st=ud — rqeiez7hqd98&re — link=desktopwebshare_permalink (exploring the decision by Columbia to involve law en — orcement) 59 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

encampment, leading to the arrest o

over 100 students.240 The university’s decision to involve law en — orcement was condemned by many — aculty members and student organizations, — urther escalating tensions.241 In response, hundreds o —

aculty members issued statements condemning Sha — ik’s tactics, and many walked out in support o — their students.242 Sha — ik de — ended her actions by citing the need to maintain the university’s operational integrity, claiming the protests posed a “clear and present danger” to campus

unctions.243

The

allout — rom these events was pro — ound. Sha — ik, — acing mounting pressure — rom both within the university and — rom public intellectuals, announced her resignation in August 2024, becoming the — i — th Ivy League president to step down in the wake o — campus protests over the Israel-Hamas con — lict.244 Sha — ik acknowledged the di —

iculty o — her position, stating that the turmoil had taken a considerable toll on her — amily and the university community.245 The protest group Students — or Justice in Palestine welcomed her resignation, issuing statements that — uture leadership should heed student demands — or divestment or — ace similar consequences.246

Sha

ik’s resignation — ollowed a string o — other administrative departures, including three deans who resigned a — ter their involvement in controversial communications regarding the protests came to light.247 Columbia’s response to the protests, and particularly the involvement o — law en — orcement, became a — ocal point o — criticism — rom both Democratic and Republican politicians, as well as media outlets across the spectrum. Despite the leadership changes, the university maintained its re — usal to divest — rom Israeli-linked companies, citing the complexity o — its — inancial and academic relationships.248

240 Sonel Cutler, Alecia Taylor, and Amelia Benavides-Colón, Here’s Where Student Protestors Have Demanded Divestment — rom Israel, THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION (Apr. 2024), https://www.chronicle.com/article/heres-where-student-protesters-are-demanding-divestment- — rom-israel (“Many o — the student protests took the — orm o — ‘Gaza solidarity encampments’ or ‘liberated zones,’ inspired by pro-Palestinian student protesters at Columbia University, where more than 100 protesters were arrested on April 18”). 241 Columbia University President Resigns Following Backlash Over Gaza Protests, PRESSTV (Aug. 15, 2024 8:38 AM), https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/08/15/731400/Colombia-university-president-resign-Gaza- protest. 242 Id. 243 Id. 244 See source cited supra note 217. 245 Columbia President Resigns Amid Criticism Over Her Response to Anti-Israel Protests, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL (Aug. 15, 2024), https://www.timeso — israel.com/columbia-president-resigns-amid-criticism-over-her- response-to-anti-israel-protests/. 246 Id. (“To be clear, any — uture president who does not pay heed to the Columbia student body’s overwhelming demand — or divestment will end up exactly as President Sha — ik did . . . “). 247 See source cited supra note 217.

                                            60 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

This series o

events has had a lasting impact on Columbia’s public image and has sparked broader discussions about the role o — universities in handling politically charged protests and balancing — ree speech with institutional responsibility.

   5. UCLA

The University o

Cali — ornia, Los Angeles (UCLA), established in 1919, has grown into one o —

the largest and most respected public research universities in the United States. As part o

the prestigious University o

Cali — ornia system, UCLA has made signi — icant contributions to academia across various disciplines, including medicine, law, engineering, and the arts. It has also played a prominent role in shaping higher education in Cali — ornia, making advanced education more accessible to diverse populations, which has signi — icantly impacted the social and economic landscape o — the state.

UCLA’s history is closely intertwined with key socio-political movements in the United States. During the Civil Rights Movement, UCLA was a hub — or activism, with students and

aculty participating in protests and demonstrations advocating — or racial equality. The university became a — ocal point during the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s, re — lecting broader national debates on civil liberties and academic — reedom. UCLA has also been involved in labor rights movements, with students and sta —

advocating — or better working conditions — or campus employees, — urther highlighting the university’s engagement in socio-political issues.

More recently, UCLA has been actively involved in addressing contemporary social movements, particularly the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Following the protests in 2020, UCLA implemented several initiatives to address systemic racism, including the

ormation o — a Task Force on Advancing Racial Equity and the expansion o — its Center — or the Study o — Racism, Social Justice, and Health. These actions are part o — a broader e —

ort to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) on campus. UCLA has also taken signi — icant steps to — oster a more inclusive environment — or historically underrepresented groups, making changes to admissions policies and increasing — unding — or DEI-related programs.

In addition to its work on social justice, UCLA has demonstrated a strong commitment to global challenges such as climate change and sustainability. The university has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2025 as part o — the University o — Cali — ornia’s system-wide initiative. UCLA’s Sustainable LA Grand Challenge is another notable e —

ort, bringing together researchers and policymakers to tackle environmental issues in the Los Angeles region with the goal o — making the city — ully sustainable by 2050. These initiatives showcase UCLA’s leadership in addressing both local and global environmental concerns.

                                     61 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Through its historical and contemporary engagements, UCLA continues to shape public discourse on issues o — justice, equality, and sustainability. The university’s intellectual and moral leadership, as demonstrated by its involvement in social movements, research contributions, and public policy initiatives, re — lects its ongoing commitment to addressing the challenges o — both the past and the present.

        a. UCLA’s Initial Administrative Statement

UCLA’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was delivered by Chancellor Gene Block on October 9.249 In his statement, issued soon a — ter the attacks, Block expressed deep sadness over the violence in Israel and Gaza and called

or compassion within the campus community. The tone o — the message was measured and neutral, — ocusing on the need — or peace and unity. He stated, “Violence, hate, and prejudice have no place at UCLA.” The administration emphasized its commitment to supporting students through mental health services and rein — orced campus sa — ety measures. No immediate political stance was taken, with the statement — ocusing on maintaining a respect — ul environment — or dialogue. UCLA Campus Protests and Calls — or Divestment.

        b. UCLA’s Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

A

ter the events o — October 7, student activism at UCLA surged, particularly through calls

or divestment — rom companies linked to Israel. The protests were led by organizations like Students — or Justice in Palestine (SJP) and the UC Divest Coalition, which rallied students on campus to demand the university cut — inancial ties with corporations accused o —

supporting Israel’s military actions.250 A notable rally occurred where students gathered to denounce the university’s investments and support — or companies allegedly complicit in the violence in Gaza.251 Speakers at the rally invoked divestment as a success — ul method o —

bringing about social change, drawing parallels to past movements like those against apartheid in South A — rica.252

The student government at UCLA responded to these demands by passing resolutions calling — or the University o — Cali — ornia system, including UCLA, to divest — rom companies

249 UCLA Chancellor, University Statements on Violent Attacks Abroad, https://chancellor.ucla.edu/messages/university-statements-on-violent-attacks-abroad/. 250 Dylan Winward, Student Organizations Hold Rally Demanding UCLA’s Divestment From Israel, DAILY BRUIN (Feb. 8, 2024), https://dailybruin.com/2024/02/08/student-organizations-host-rally-demanding-uclas- divestment- — rom-israel. 251 Id. 252 Id. 62 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

doing business with Israel.253 However, UCLA’s administration, led by Chancellor Gene Block, made it clear that the university and the UC Board o — Regents would not support divestment — rom Israel.254 In his o —

icial statement, Block reiterated the administration’s position against divestment, citing the university’s commitment to academic — reedom and the un — ettered exchange o — ideas.255 He stressed that divestment decisions should be made with — airness and should not single out any one country, underscoring that the Board o — Regents had previously rejected calls — or similar actions.

The protests were closely monitored by university o

icials, who ensured that protest activities complied with campus policies on — ree speech and assembly.256 Security measures were also heightened to manage potential clashes between pro-divestment protesters and counter-protesters supporting Israel.257

        c. Analysis o ---  UCLA’s (Dis)Entanglement

UCLA’s response to the post-October 7 protests, particularly those advocating

or divestment — rom Israel, sparked national scrutiny and signi — icant media attention. Led by pro-Palestinian groups, protests on campus called — or UCLA to divest — rom companies linked to Israel.258 Chancellor Gene Block testi — ied be — ore Congress in May 2024, where he

aced criticism — or the university’s handling o — these protests, particularly regarding violence and antisemitic incidents.259 While UCLA maintained its stance against divestment, citing academic — reedom and policy consistency across the University o —

Cali

ornia system, the administration — aced criticism — or the delayed response in addressing campus unrest.260 This led to increased security on campus, heightened

253 UCLA Students Pass Israel Divestment Resolution, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL (Nov. 19, 2023), https://www.timeso — israel.com/ucla-students-pass-israel-divestment-resolution/. 254 News Statement, UCLA Statement on Resolutions by Student Government Associations, UCLA NEWSROOM (Feb. 21, 2024), https://newsroom.ucla.edu/ucla-statement-on-resolutions-by-student-government- associations. 255 Id. 256 See A —

irming Our Values in a Challenging Time, UCLA CHANCELLOR (Apr. 30, 2024), https://chancellor.ucla.edu/messages/a —

irming-our-values-in-a-challenging-time/ (hereina — ter ‘A —

irming Values’). 257 See id. 258 See Winward, supra note 225. 259 Shaanth Kodialam, Gene Block Faces Scrutiny Over Protests Response in Congress Antisemitism Hearing, DAILY BRUIN (May 25, 2024), https://dailybruin.com/2024/05/23/gene-block- — aces-backlash-over-protest- response-in-congress-antisemitism-hearing. 260 Christine Mai-Duc, UCLA Chancellor Widely Criticized — or Slow Response to Campus Violence, THE WALL STREET JOURN. (May 3, 2024), https://www.wsj.com/us-news/ucla-chancellor-gene-block-criticism-protests- 80c6ba2b. 63 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

oversight, and policy reviews to ensure campus sa

ety and — ree speech. 261 Chancellor Block resigned at the end o — this turbulent academic year.

       6. Cornell University

Cornell University,

ounded in 1865, holds a unique place in American higher education as a private Ivy League institution with a land-grant mission, allowing it to combine elite academic scholarship with a commitment to public service. Established by Ezra Cornell and Andrew Dickson White, Cornell was — ounded on principles o — inclusivity, aiming to provide education — or all regardless o — race, gender, or socioeconomic background. This

orward-thinking mission has guided the university’s historical development and continues to shape its in — luence in both academia and broader societal issues.

Throughout its history, Cornell has been involved in key socio-political movements and events. During the 1960s, the university played a signi — icant role in the national discourse on civil rights and the Vietnam War. In 1969, the occupation o — Willard Straight Hall by Black students protesting racism on campus marked a de — ining moment in Cornell’s history. The event not only brought national attention to racial issues in higher education but also led to lasting changes in university policy, including the creation o — the A — ricana Studies and Research Center. This incident was emblematic o — Cornell’s engagement with the larger civil rights movement and its willingness to con — ront institutional challenges related to race and equity.

In more recent years, Cornell has actively engaged with contemporary social movements, such as Black Lives Matter. Following the nationwide protests in 2020, Cornell established a series o — initiatives to address racial inequality, including the launch o — the Cornell Faculty Task Force to Advance Racial Equity and the development o — new curricula

ocused on race and social justice. The university has made e —

orts to enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across campus, with measures such as increasing scholarships

or underrepresented students and expanding programs to support DEI-related research and teaching.

Cornell has also demonstrated a strong commitment to addressing global challenges like climate change and sustainability. The university aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2035, as part o — its Climate Action Plan, and it has implemented numerous sustainability initiatives across its campuses. Cornell’s Atkinson Center — or Sustainability is a leading institution — or interdisciplinary research on environmental issues, partnering with public and private sectors to develop solutions — or sustainable development worldwide.

261 See A —

irming Values, supra note 231. 64 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Through its historical engagements in socio-political a

airs and its ongoing e —

orts to address contemporary challenges, Cornell University exempli — ies its commitment to intellectual and moral leadership. Its responses to movements like Black Lives Matter, as well as its work on global sustainability, highlight its continuing in — luence in shaping public discourse and contributing to societal change. This dual — ocus on both academic excellence and public service remains at the core o — Cornell’s mission, rein — orcing its role as a leader in higher education and global a —

airs.

        a. Cornell’s Initial Administrative Statement

Cornell University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was issued by President Martha E. Pollack.262 In her statement, Pollack expressed sorrow

or the violence in Israel and Gaza, while underscoring the need — or empathy and support within the Cornell community.263 The tone o — the statement was neutral and — ocused on healing, stating, “Our thoughts are with all those a —

ected by the violence.”264 Pollack also emphasized that Cornell is a place — or open dialogue and respect — ul exchange o — ideas, while o —

ering mental health resources and rea —

irming the university’s commitment to campus sa — ety.265

        b. Cornell’s Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, student activism at Cornell University intensi — ied, with signi — icant calls — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel. The primary organizing group, the Coalition — or Mutual Liberation (CML), led protests and sit-ins demanding that Cornell divest its $10 billion endowment — rom corporations they claimed were complicit in supporting Israel’s military actions in Gaza.266 Speci — ically, CML targeted companies such as BAE Systems, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and others linked to arms manu — acturing — or the Israeli military.267 Additionally, the group demanded that Cornell terminate its partnership with the Technion-Israel Institute o — Technology, which they argued played a role in supporting Israel’s military e —

orts.268

262 University Statement, Cornell University, Response to the Terrorism in Israel (Oct. 10, 2023) https://statements.cornell.edu/2023/20231010-world-events.c — m 263 Id. 264 See id. 265 Id. 266 Arvind Dilawar, Cornell Students Push — or Divestment From Companies Arming Israel, THE PROGRESSIVE MAGAZINE (Feb. 13, 2024), https://progressive.org/latest/cornell-students-push- — or-divestment- — rom- companies-arming-israel-dilawar-20240213/ 267 Id. 268 Id. 65 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

These student protests were accompanied by a

ormal resolution introduced in the Student Assembly, which called on the university to divest — rom companies involved in what was described as “morally reprehensible actions” in Gaza.269 Despite these e —

orts, the resolution was ultimately rejected by the Student Assembly with a 16-4 vote.270 The administration, led by President Martha Pollack, also declined to pursue divestment, citing the university’s divestment guidelines, which require a company’s actions to meet a high threshold o — being deemed “morally reprehensible” by the Board o — Trustees.271 Pollack also re — erenced New York state law, which prohibits penalizing companies — or doing business with Israel, complicating the — easibility o — such demands.272

Despite the rejection, student protests continued, with activists organizing additional demonstrations and pushing — or — urther action. However, Cornell’s administration remained — irm in its stance, emphasizing the university’s role as a neutral academic institution and expressing support — or open dialogue while maintaining its — inancial policies.273

        c. Analysis o ---  Cornell’s (Dis)Entanglement

Cornell University’s response to the student protests and calls

or divestment — rom companies linked to Israel a — ter the events o — October 7 drew considerable attention — rom the national public, media, and government. The protests, led by groups like the Coalition

or Mutual Liberation (CML), escalated in intensity, with students demanding that the university divest — rom de — ense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and other companies alleged to be complicit in Israel’s military actions in Gaza.274 Nearly 70% o —

students who participated in a re

erendum voted in — avor o — divestment, highlighting signi — icant student support — or the movement.275

President Martha Pollack, while acknowledging the students’ concerns, maintained that the university would not pursue divestment.276 In an o —

icial statement, Pollack cited the

269 Julie Senzon, Student Assembly Rejects Israel Divestment Resolution, THE CORNELL DAILY SUN (Feb. 1, 2024), https://cornellsun.com/2024/02/01/student-assembly-rejects-israel-divestment-resolution/. 270 Id. 271 Senzon, supra note 244. 272 Matt Dougherty, Cornell President Rejects Student Re — erendum Calling — or Cease — ire and Divestment, ITHACA TIMES (June 19, 2024), https://www.ithaca.com/news/ithaca/cornell-president-rejects-student- re — erendum-calling- — or-cease — ire-and-divestment/article_dc73ded2-1 — 75-11e — -b5e1-8 — eb31543db5.html. 273 See Dougherty, supra note 247. 274 Dilawar, supra note 241. 275 Matt Dougherty, Cornell Students Approve Resolution Calling — or University to Divest — rom Weapons Manu — acturers and Support a Cease — ire in Gaza, ITHACA TIMES (Apr. 22, 2024), https://www.ithaca.com/news/cornell-students-approve-resolution-calling- — or-university-to-divest- — rom- weapons-manu — acturers-and-support-a/article_4044a630-0117-11e — -8e69- — 34850aead99.html. 276 Dougherty, supra note 247. 66 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

importance o

the university’s endowment in — unding its core academic mission and expressed concerns about singling out Israel when there were no equivalent divestment demands — or other countries involved in military con — licts.277 Pollack also pointed to legal constraints under New York state law, which prohibits certain actions targeting Israel under Executive Order 157.278 Her response emphasized Cornell’s role as a neutral academic institution that does not take political stances on complex geopolitical matters, while still allowing space — or student expression and dialogue.

National media, including outlets like The Ithaca Voice and The Cornell Daily Sun, covered the protests extensively, noting both the administrative responses and the ongoing sit-ins and rallies organized by students. The protests sparked — urther debates on campus, particularly around — ree speech and sa — ety, with some activists — acing disciplinary hearings

or violating Cornell’s “Interim Expressive Activity Policy,” which restricts where and when protests can occur on campus.279 Faculty members criticized this policy, claiming it disproportionately a —

ected marginalized voices, particularly those advocating — or Palestinian rights.280

The national reaction was mixed, with some praising the university

or upholding — ree expression, while others, particularly pro-Palestinian activists, condemned the administration’s re — usal to divest. President Pollack resigned amid this controversy.

Cornell’s measured but

irm stance re — lects the challenges universities — ace when balancing student activism, institutional neutrality, and legal constraints in highly politicized contexts.

    7. MIT

The Massachusetts Institute o

Technology (MIT), — ounded in 1861, is recognized as one o —

the world’s leading institutions

or scienti — ic and technological research. Established with a mission to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas o — scholarship, MIT has played a crucial role in the development o — modern engineering and innovation. Throughout its history, MIT has made signi — icant contributions to both academic advancements and societal progress, particularly in — ields such as

277 Id. 278 Id. 279 Maggie Hicks, Private Colleges Hope New Speech Policies Will Keep the Peace, THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION (Feb. 2024) https://www.chronicle.com/article/private-colleges-hope-new-speech-policies-will- keep-the-peace (explaining new speech and protest regulations adopted by universities across the country, including Cornell’s Interim Expressive Activity Policy). 280 Christina MacCorkle, Faculty Members Continue to Denounce Interime Expressive Activity Policy’s Ambiguity, Restrictiveness, THE CORNELL DAILY SUN (Mar. 4, 2024), https://cornellsun.com/2024/03/04/ — aculty- members-continue-to-denounce-interim-expressive-activity-policys-ambiguity-restrictiveness/. 67 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

computer science, aerospace, and biotechnology. The university’s approach has always been deeply pragmatic, — ocusing on the application o — knowledge to solve real-world problems, which has helped position it at the — ore — ront o — technological development.

MIT’s historical signi

icance is also evident in its involvement with major socio-political events. During World War II, MIT contributed to the war e —

ort through the development o —

radar technology and played a key role in the Manhattan Project. In the post-war period, the university’s research was central to the Cold War arms race, shaping U.S. military and space policy. The institute has also been a site o — political activism, especially during the Vietnam War, when students and — aculty protested the university’s involvement in military research. This activism led to signi — icant changes, including a broader re — lection on the ethical implications o — research and development in technology.

In recent years, MIT has been actively involved in addressing contemporary socio-political movements. The university responded to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement by launching several initiatives aimed at promoting racial justice and addressing systemic racism. In 2020, MIT — ormed the MIT Task Force on Campus and Community to work on advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across the institution. Additionally, MIT’s Institute Community and Equity O —

ice (ICEO) has expanded programs to improve recruitment and retention o — underrepresented minorities in both student and — aculty populations, re — lecting the university’s ongoing commitment to DEI principles.281

MIT has also been a global leader in addressing climate change and sustainability. The university’s Plan — or Action on Climate Change, launched in 2015, outlines strategies — or MIT to contribute to decarbonizing the global economy.282 The institute has committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2026 and is at the — ore — ront o — research on renewable energy, sustainable cities, and climate resilience.283 MIT’s Climate and Sustainability Consortium brings together academic and industry leaders to accelerate solutions to global environmental challenges, positioning the university as a key player in the global sustainability movement.284

Overall, MIT’s intellectual and moral leadership is re

lected in its historical and contemporary engagements with critical global challenges. Whether through its contributions to technological innovation, its responses to socio-political movements like Black Lives Matter, or its commitment to sustainability and climate action, MIT has

281 See MIT INSTITUTE, CMTY., AND EQUITY OFFICE, https://iceo.mit.edu/# (last visited Sept. 27, 2024). 282 MIT’s Climate Plan — Action on Campus, MIT OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY, https://sustainability.mit.edu/plan- climate-action-page (last visited Sept. 20, 2024). 283 Id. 284 See About Us, MIT CLIMATE AND SUSTAINABILITY CONSORTIUM, https://impactclimate.mit.edu (last visited Sept. 20, 2024). 68 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

consistently leveraged its research and educational resources to address pressing societal issues. The university’s pragmatic, solution-oriented approach continues to in — luence public discourse and policy, maintaining its role as a leading institution in both academic and global a —

airs.

        a. MIT’s Initial Administrative Statement

MIT’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was issued by President Sally Kornbluth.285 In her public statement, Kornbluth expressed deep sorrow over the violence in Israel and Gaza, o —

ering condolences to those a —

ected. She highlighted MIT’s commitment to supporting its students, particularly those with ties to the region, and emphasized the importance o — providing mental health resources. The tone o —

the statement was empathetic but neutral,

ocusing on the need — or campus unity. Kornbluth rea —

irmed MIT’s dedication to — ree expression, stating, “We uphold the value o —

open dialogue, even in moments o

pro — ound pain.” Immediate actions included enhancing support services — or students and rein — orcing campus sa — ety measures.

        b. MIT Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, student protests at MIT quickly gained momentum, with student groups, particularly Students — or Justice in Palestine (SJP), leading calls — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel.286 Demonstrators targeted de — ense contractors like Raytheon and Boeing, companies accused o — supplying military equipment to Israel. Protests were organized on campus, with some blocking entry to the main lobby as part o —

their e

orts to disrupt normal campus activity and increase pressure on the administration.

In response, MIT’s administration reiterated its commitment to

ree speech while en — orcing university policies related to public demonstrations. President Sally Kornbluth issued statements a —

irming MIT’s support — or peace — ul protest but emphasized the need to respect campus rules and ensure the sa — ety o — all community members. 287 MIT did not adopt any divestment policies, continuing to uphold its long-standing neutrality regarding such political issues. Security was also increased during larger protests to prevent disruptions and maintain order.

285 MIT President Sally Kornbluth, Video transcript: Our community and the violence in Israel and Gaza (October 10, 2023), https://president.mit.edu/writing-speeches/video-transcript-our-community-and- violence-israel-and-gaza. 286 See Christina Hager, MIT Warns Students Suspensions Are in the Works A — ter Campus Protests, CBS NEWS (May 7, 2024), https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/mit-campus-protests-suspensions-boston/. 287 Sally Kornbluth, Actions Being Taken Regarding the Encampment, MIT ORGANIZATIONAL CHART (May 6, 2024). 69 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

        c. Analysis o ---  MIT’s (Dis)Entanglement

The national response to MIT’s handling o

protests — ollowing the events o — October 7 drew both criticism and praise — rom various sectors, including public intellectuals, lawmakers, and the media. MIT, led by President Sally Kornbluth, — aced signi — icant student activism, particularly — rom pro-Palestinian groups calling — or divestment — rom companies linked to Israel’s military actions.288 As protests un — olded on campus, including disruptive demonstrations in key campus locations like Lobby 7, MIT’s administration emphasized maintaining a balance between protecting — ree expression and en — orcing campus policies to ensure sa — ety and order.289

Kornbluth testi

ied be — ore Congress in December 2023 as part o — a high-pro — ile hearing on campus antisemitism, alongside the presidents o — Harvard and the University o —

Pennsylvania.290 Like her counterparts, Kornbluth was criticized

or her responses to questions on whether calling — or genocide against Jews would violate MIT’s code o —

conduct.291 Her more restrained, non-apologetic stance

ollowing the testimony, compared to the other university leaders, garnered both criticism and support.292 Critics argued that Kornbluth’s handling o — the situation re — lected a lack o — moral clarity, while others de — ended her approach as consistent with MIT’s policies on — ree expression. Despite the controversy, Kornbluth has retained her position, avoiding the — allout seen at other universities where leadership changes — ollowed similar criticism.

MIT’s response to the protests included temporary suspensions

or students who re — used to vacate campus spaces, although the suspensions were limited to non-academic activities to mitigate potential visa issues — or international students. 293 This measured approach sought to balance discipline with student well-being, emphasizing that MIT supports — ree speech while setting clear boundaries to prevent disruption o — essential academic — unctions.294

288 Barbara Moran, MIT Students Protest and March A — ter Clearing o — Campus Encampment, WBUR (May 10, 2024), https://www.wbur.org/news/2024/05/10/mit-students-protest-gaza-encampment-suspension. 289 Sally Kornbluth, Today’s Protest and Counter-Protest, MIT OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (Nov. 9, 2023), https://president.mit.edu/writing-speeches/todays-protest-and-counterprotest. 290 Juliana Kim, Here’s the Latest Fallout at Harvard, MIT and Penn A — ter the Antisemitism Hearing, IOWA PUBLIC RADIO (Dec. 11, 2023), https://www.iowapublicradio.org/news- — rom-npr/2023-12-11/heres-the-latest- — allout- at-harvard-mit-and-penn-a — ter-the-antisemitism-hearing. 291 Id. 292 Menachem Wecker, Harvard, Penn Presidents Attempt Hearing Cleanup, MIT Head Does Not, JEWISH NEWS SYNDICATE (Dec. 7, 2023), https://www.jns.org/harvard-penn-presidents-attempt-hearing-cleanup-mit-head- does-not/. 293 Kornbluth, supra note 261. 294 Id. 70 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In the broader media landscape, MIT was viewed as more restrained in its

allout compared to Harvard and UPenn, though the criticism — rom some corners o — Congress and Jewish advocacy groups continues to place the university under scrutiny — or its handling o —

the protests and

ree speech debates.

    8. Stan --- ord University

Stan

ord University, — ounded in 1885 by Leland and Jane Stan — ord in memory o — their son, has become one o — the world’s leading research institutions. Originally established with a mission to promote the public wel — are by exercising an in — luence on behal — o — humanity and civilization, Stan — ord has since grown into a global academic powerhouse, particularly in — ields such as engineering, business, and medicine. Located in Cali — ornia’s Silicon Valley, Stan — ord’s close ties to the tech industry have positioned it at the — ore — ront o —

technological innovation and entrepreneurship, pro

oundly shaping both regional and global economic landscapes.

Historically, Stan

ord has played an important role in signi — icant socio-political movements. During the 1960s and 1970s, the campus was a hotbed o — activism, particularly during the Vietnam War, when students protested U.S. involvement in the con — lict and the university’s research ties to military contracts. This period o — activism led to institutional changes, including increased scrutiny o — Stan — ord’s research agenda and a more open dialogue on the ethical responsibilities o — academic institutions. Stan — ord also played a role in the anti-apartheid movement, with students and — aculty advocating — or the university to divest — rom companies doing business in South A — rica during the 1980s.

In recent years, Stan

ord has been actively engaged in addressing contemporary social and political issues, particularly those related to racial justice. Following the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, Stan — ord launched several initiatives to con — ront systemic racism and improve diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across the university. These initiatives include the IDEAL (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access in a Learning Environment) program, aimed at trans — orming the campus culture to be more inclusive.295 Stan — ord also established new academic programs — ocused on race and justice, re — lecting a commitment to addressing these issues through both scholarship and institutional re — orm.

Stan

ord has also taken a leadership role in tackling global challenges like climate change. The university’s Sustainability Initiative, alongside its cutting-edge research at the Stan — ord Woods Institute — or the Environment, aims to address pressing environmental issues such as climate change, water scarcity, and biodiversity loss.296 In 2020, Stan — ord announced its

295 About IDEAL, STANFORD IDEAL, https://ideal.stan — ord.edu/about-ideal (last visited Sept. 22, 2024). 296 About Us, STANFORD WOODS INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, https://woods.stan — ord.edu/about/about-us (last visited Sept. 22, 2024). 71 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, underscoring its long-term commitment to sustainability.297 The university’s interdisciplinary approach to solving global problems, integrating insights — rom engineering, policy, and the social sciences, positions Stan — ord as a critical player in the — ight against climate change.

Stan

ord’s intellectual and moral leadership is evident in its contributions to both historical and contemporary challenges. The university’s ongoing e —

orts to promote diversity, equity, and sustainability, coupled with its historical involvement in key socio-political movements, re — lect its broader mission to advance the public good. Through its academic research, public discourse, and institutional initiatives, Stan — ord continues to shape not only higher education but also the global conversation on justice, equity, and environmental responsibility.

        a. Stan --- ord’s Initial Administrative Statement

Stan

ord University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o — October 7 came — rom President Richard Saller, who issued a statement acknowledging the violence and its impact on the campus community.298 The statement expressed deep concern — or those a —

ected by the con — lict, emphasizing that their hearts are with all those who have been directly impacted by this horri — ic violence. The tone was empathetic and neutral,

ocusing on the need — or community solidarity and support. Saller emphasized that Stan — ord is committed to providing a sa — e space — or dialogue and highlighted mental health services available — or students during this time.299

        b. Stan --- ord’s Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, Stan — ord University became a signi — icant site — or student activism, particularly concerning calls — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel. Protests were organized primarily by the group Liberate Stan — ord in collaboration with Students — or Justice in Palestine (SJP). The movement’s demands included divestment

rom major de — ense contractors like Lockheed Martin and Hewlett-Packard (HP), which students accused o — supplying Israel with military technologies used in Gaza. 300

297 Sustainability at Stan — ord, STANFORD 2022-23 YEAR IN REV., https://sustainability-year-in- review.stan — ord.edu/2023/ (last visited Sept. 24, 2024). 298 President Saller and Provost Martinez on the Middle East Con — lict, STANFORD REPORT (Oct. 9, 2023), https://news.stan — ord.edu/stories/2023/10/president-saller-provost-martinez-middle-east-con — lict. 299 See id. 300 Stan — ord Protests: Here’s a Closer Look at University’s Ties, Top 3 Israeli-Backing Companies Students Want Divestment From, PATABOOK NEWS (Apr. 28, 2024), https://patabook.com/news/2024/04/28/stan — ord- protests-heres-a-closer-look-at-universitys-ties-top-3-israeli-backing-companies-students-want- divestment- — rom/. 72 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Demonstrators also demanded that Stan

ord sever its academic and — inancial ties to Israeli institutions.301

A key moment in the protests occurred when students set up an encampment known as the “People’s University — or Palestine” in Stan — ord’s White Plaza.302 This encampment grew into a sit-in that lasted — or several weeks, with the participants calling — or divestment and

or the university to take a clear stance on Israel’s military actions in Gaza.303 Over 100 students participated at various points in the protest, with around 20 consistently camping out in the plaza.304 The protest also called — or broader academic support — or Palestinian students and increased mental health resources — or those a —

ected by the con — lict.305

Stan

ord’s administration, led by President Richard Saller, responded by emphasizing the university’s commitment to — ree speech while also maintaining that divestment decisions would remain with the Board o — Trustees. In a public statement, Stan — ord reiterated that its endowment has no direct holdings in Israeli companies or de — ense contractors, but small exposures could exist through passive index — unds. 306 While university o —

icials met with student organizers, they declined to endorse the divestment demands, citing the Board’s longstanding policy on political neutrality.307 Additionally, President Saller condemned acts o — vandalism and violence that occurred during some protests, stating that such actions would not be tolerated.308

        c. Analysis o ---  Stan --- ord’s (Dis)Entanglement

Stan

ord University’s response to the protests and calls — or divestment — ollowing the events o — October 7 drew national attention, particularly due to the protracted sit-in that became the longest in the university’s history. Beginning on October 20, 2023, students associated with the “Sit-In to Stop Genocide” organized outside Stan — ord’s White Plaza,

301 See id.; see also Pauline Ertel, Pro-Palestinian Campus Protests: What Have They Achieved So Far?, MIDDLE EAST EYE (Aug. 14, 2024), https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/war-on-gaza-campus-solidarity- protests-what-has-been-achieved. 302 Patabook News, supra note 274. 303 Isha Trivedi, Stan — ord Students Continue Sit-In, Demand University Condemn Israel’s Siege on Gaza, PALO ALTO ONLINE (Nov. 2, 2023), https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023/11/02/stan — ord-students-continue- sit-in-demand-university-condemn-israels-siege-on-gaza/. 304 Id. 305 See Isha Trivedi, Stan — ord Sit-In Persists Despite Holidays, Lack o — Response From University Leaders, PALO ALTO ONLINE (Dec. 22, 2023), https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023/12/22/stan — ord-sit-in- persists-despite-holidays-lack-o — -response- — rom-university-leaders/. 306 Patabook News, supra note 274. 307 See Insight Sta —

, Historic Stan — ord Sit-In Comes to an End, INSIGHT INTO DIVERSITY (Feb. 19, 2024), https://www.insightintodiversity.com/historic-stan — ord-sit-in-comes-to-an-end/. 308 See Terry Chea & Olga R. Rodriguez, Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators Arrested at Stan — ord University A — ter Occupying President’s O —

ice, ASSOCIATED PRESS (June 5, 2024), https://apnews.com/article/campus- protests-stan — ord-israel-gaza- — 1ec47dcac1b55839e96b5442ebc — 00d. 73 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

demanding that the university divest

rom companies linked to Israel’s military actions and endorse a cease — ire in Gaza.309 The protesters also called — or more resources to support Palestinian and Arab students a —

ected by the con — lict.310

National public and media reactions to Stan

ord’s handling o — the protests were divided. Supporters o — the protest, including various media outlets and intellectuals, praised the students’ persistence and criticized the university’s leadership — or not taking a — irmer stance against Israel. On the other hand, conservative media, as well as pro-Israel groups, condemned the university’s perceived leniency towards the protesters. Stan — ord’s administration, led by President Richard Saller, maintained a delicate balance by allowing the protests to continue while ensuring that university operations were not disrupted. 311 Saller met with the student representatives but did not accede to their demands — or divestment.312 Instead, he agreed to bring issues such as investment transparency and divestment — rom weapons manu — acturers to the Board o — Trustees — or discussion, though without making any commitments.313

The protest gained signi

icant media attention, with outlets like Palo Alto Online and Insight Into Diversity chronicling the events. Stan — ord did not — ace the level o — congressional oversight or harsh public criticism that some other universities, like Harvard and the University o — Pennsylvania, experienced. However, the university’s re — usal to take decisive action on the protesters’ demands, such as endorsing a boycott or divestment — rom Israeli- linked companies,314 did spark ongoing debates on campus and in national media circles.

The university’s measured response to the protests, particularly its willingness to meet with student activists while avoiding direct con — rontation, allowed Stan — ord to largely avoid major leadership turnover or signi — icant public condemnation. However, the protest illuminated the complexities universities — ace in balancing — ree speech, activism, and institutional neutrality on highly charged political issues. This ongoing tension at Stan — ord re — lects broader national debates on the role o — universities in addressing geopolitical con — licts.

309 Insight Sta —

, supra note 281. 310 See Trivedi, supra note 279. 311 See, e.g., Eugene Volokh, Stan — ord President’s Message About Student Misconduct “as Part o — a Protest March”, REASON (May 25, 2024), https://reason.com/volokh/2024/05/25/stan — ord-presidents-message- about-student-misconduct-as-part-o — -a-protest-march/ (discussing investigation and disciplinary proceedings which ensued when students entered a science building and disrupted lab operation). 312 Insight Sta —

, supra note 281. 313 Id. 314 Id. 74 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

   9. Princeton University

Princeton University,

ounded in 1746, is one o — the oldest and most prestigious institutions o — higher education in the United States. Initially established to train ministers, it has evolved into a leading research university known — or its strong emphasis on undergraduate education and its contributions to academic and intellectual thought. Over the centuries, Princeton has played an in — luential role in shaping American political, social, and academic discourse, with its alumni network producing notable leaders in government, business, and academia, including several U.S. presidents.

Throughout its history, Princeton has been involved in signi

icant socio-political events. In the 1960s, during the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War, Princeton, like many universities, became a — ocal point — or student activism. While initially slower than some peer institutions to engage in racial issues, by the late 1960s, Princeton began to admit more students o — color and create programs that re — lected the demands o — a diversi — ying student body. These changes were part o — broader social pressures — or civil rights and inclusion, with the student body and — aculty increasingly advocating — or racial justice and university re — orm. Princeton’s anti-apartheid activism in the 1980s also showcased the university’s engagement in global socio-political issues, as students and — aculty pushed

or divestment — rom companies operating in apartheid-era South A — rica.

More recently, Princeton has been active in addressing contemporary social movements, particularly those related to racial justice. In response to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and the national reckoning with systemic racism — ollowing the death o — George Floyd in 2020, Princeton took several steps to con — ront its own historical ties to slavery and racism. The university removed the name o — Woodrow Wilson, a — ormer U.S. president and Princeton alumnus, — rom its School o — Public and International A —

airs, due to his segregationist policies.315 Additionally, Princeton launched initiatives to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across campus, including e —

orts to diversi — y — aculty, enhance support — or underrepresented students, and expand research on racial justice through programs like the Princeton A — rican American Studies Department.

Princeton is also deeply engaged in global challenges, particularly through its sustainability e —

orts. The university has committed to achieving net carbon neutrality by 2046, the 300th anniversary o — its — ounding, and has implemented a range o — sustainability

315 O —

ice o — Communications, Board o — Trustee’s Decision on Removing Woodrow Wilson’s Name From Public Policy School and Residential College, PRINCETON UNIV. (June 27, 2020), https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/06/27/board-trustees-decision-removing-woodrow-wilsons-name- public-policy-school-and. 75 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

initiatives to reduce its environmental impact.316 Through its Princeton Environmental Institute (now the High Meadows Environmental Institute), the university supports interdisciplinary research on climate change, biodiversity, and environmental policy, re — lecting its role in addressing global environmental issues.317

In conclusion, Princeton’s intellectual and moral leadership is grounded in its historical and contemporary engagements with socio-political issues. From its involvement in movements — or racial justice and anti-apartheid activism to its current initiatives — ocused on DEI and sustainability, Princeton has demonstrated a commitment to both academic excellence and social responsibility. By engaging with pressing challenges, both past and present, the university continues to in — luence public discourse and contribute to the global e —

ort — or a more just and sustainable world.

        a. Princeton’s Initial Administrative Statement

Princeton University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was led by President Christopher L. Eisgruber, who issued a statement expressing deep sorrow — or the violence and the su —

ering experienced by those a —

ected.318 The tone o — the message was neutral and — ocused on empathy, emphasizing the importance o — supporting all members o — the university community.319 Eisgruber highlighted Princeton’s commitment to — ree speech and respect — ul discourse, encouraging the community to continue to engage in di —

icult conversations with care and respect. The administration also made mental health and counseling resources readily available to students during this time. 320

        b. Princeton Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

A

ter the events o — October 7, Princeton University became a — ocal point — or signi — icant student activism, particularly through protests demanding the university divest — rom companies involved with Israel. A coalition o — student groups under the banner o —

“Palestine Divest Now” organized multiple protests and sit-ins, calling

or Princeton to sever its — inancial ties with companies that “pro — it — rom or engage in the State o — Israel’s

316 Emily Aronson, Princeton University Sustainability Plan Aims — or Net Zero Emissions by 2046, PRINCETON UNIV. (Apr. 22, 2019), https://www.princeton.edu/news/2019/04/22/princeton-university-sustainability-plan- aims-net-zero-emissions-2046. 317 About HMEI, HIGH MEADOWS ENV’T. INSTITUTE, https://environment.princeton.edu/about/, (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 318 Christopher L. Eisgruber, Statement on Terrorist Attacks and War in the Middle East, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (Oct. 10, 2023), https://president.princeton.edu/blogs/statement-terrorist-attacks- and-war-middle-east. 319 See id. 320 Id. 76 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

military campaign.”321 These protests included the establishment o

an encampment on campus, symbolizing solidarity with Gaza, which was quickly dismantled by the university a — ter students were warned o — possible arrest.322

Protesters continued their e

orts through a “Popular University — or Gaza,” holding teach- ins and discussions led by — aculty members on the lawn o — McCosh Courtyard.323 Students also pushed — or broader academic and cultural boycotts o — Israeli institutions and criticized the university’s involvement with de — ense-related research — unded by the U.S. Department o — De — ense.324

The university, led by President Christopher Eisgruber, responded by reiterating its commitment to — ree speech and peace — ul protest while emphasizing that such demonstrations must comply with university regulations.325 The administration en — orced policies prohibiting encampments and disruptive activities, leading to the removal o — the protest tents and the arrest o — a — ew students.326 Despite the protests, and its serious consideration o — divestment, Princeton did not divest against Israel, continuing its practice o — institutional neutrality on political issues, in line with university policy.

        c. Analysis o ---  Princeton’s (Dis)Entanglement

Princeton University’s response to the post-October 7 protests, particularly those advocating — or divestment and boycotts related to Israel, drew signi — icant attention and both criticism and support — rom national and local media, — ederal government o —

icials, and intellectuals. The protests, spearheaded by pro-Palestinian student groups, escalated into a sit-in at McCosh Courtyard and Clio Hall, demanding Princeton’s divestment — rom companies tied to Israel’s military actions.327 Notably, these protests were — ramed around calls — or broader academic boycotts and more robust institutional support — or Palestinian students.

321 See Asa Santos, It’s Not Too Late to Choose the Right Side o — History, THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN (Sept. 17, 2024), https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2024/09/princeton-opinion-column-activism-community- engagement-encampment-divest. 322 See id. 323 David Chmielewski, Our Memory o — the Popular University — or Gaza Teaches us How to Reimagine the University, THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN (June 2, 2024), https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2024/06/princeton-opinion-opguest-encampment- remembering-memory-story-solidarity-gaza-radical-tradition. 324 See Santos, supra note 295. 325 See Olivia Sanchez & Annie Ruperta, Eisgruber Says Protestors Must Clear Encamptment, Divestment to be Formally Considered, THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN (May 13, 2024), https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2024/05/princeton-news-adpol-gaza-solidarity-encampment- divestment-statement-eisgruber. 326 Id. 327 See id.; see also Santos, supra note 250. 77 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

President Christopher Eisgruber and the university administration adopted a care

ul stance throughout the protests, allowing demonstrations to continue while maintaining statements about the university’s neutrality on divestment. Eisgruber emphasized Princeton’s commitment to — ree speech, asserting that while repugnant speech must be tolerated under university policy, calls — or violence, such as genocide, would be met with

orce — ul administrative action.328 This balanced response was aimed at respecting the university’s core values o —

ree expression while ensuring the sa — ety o — all students on campus.329

The protests gained national media attention, with outlets such as The Daily Princetonian and Princeton Alumni Weekly extensively covering the events. The university’s re — usal to divest and its en — orcement o — policies, including the arrest o — several protesters, led to

urther debate among — aculty, alumni, and national observers. Some critics within the media and public intellectual circles expressed concern that Princeton had not done enough to address the demands o — student activists, while others lauded Eisgruber’s de — ense o —

ree speech and the university’s measured approach.

Eisgruber’s testimony be

ore congressional hearings on antisemitism also placed Princeton in the national spotlight, though the university largely avoided the severe — allout seen at other institutions like Harvard and the University o — Pennsylvania. Eisgruber — irmly rejected the notion that Princeton had tolerated antisemitic language, stating that the university had not heard calls — or genocide on campus, but reiterated that such rhetoric would be met with swi — t action i — it arose. 330

Overall, Princeton’s handling o

the protests has been viewed as a delicate balancing act— preserving — ree expression while navigating intense pressures — rom both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli groups. Although the university did not experience major leadership turnover, the events underscored the challenges o — managing campus activism in the context o — a highly charged international con — lict.

    10. NYU

New York University (NYU),

ounded in 1831, has grown to become one o — the largest private research universities in the United States, with a diverse student body and a global presence. Located in the heart o — New York City, NYU has historically distinguished itsel —

328 Sandeep Mangot & Isabel Conolly, Eisgruber Issues Statement in Response to Congressional Hearing on Antisemitism, THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN (Dec. 12, 2023), https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2023/12/princeton-news-adpol-christopher-eisgruber- congressional-hearings. 329 See id. 330 See Mangot & Conolly, supra note 302. 78 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

through its commitment to serving a diverse urban population and embracing an open, inclusive educational model. From its inception, NYU was established with a mission to provide education to all, regardless o — class, background, or religion, setting it apart — rom more exclusive Ivy League institutions. Over time, the university has become a leader in

ields such as law, business, the arts, and social sciences, in — luencing both academic thought and public policy.

NYU has been actively engaged in several key socio-political movements throughout its history. During the 1960s, the university became a center — or anti-war activism during the Vietnam War, with students and — aculty organizing protests and sit-ins, calling attention to U.S. — oreign policy and its impacts. NYU was also involved in the Civil Rights Movement, with students participating in marches and advocating — or racial equality and justice. The university has continued to be a — orum — or public discourse on social issues, re — lecting the broader political climate o — New York City and the nation.

In more recent years, NYU has played a signi

icant role in the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and the broader push — or racial justice. Following the 2020 protests, the university announced a series o — initiatives aimed at addressing systemic racism and improving diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) on campus. These e —

orts included the establishment o — the NYU O —

ice o — Global Inclusion, Diversity, and Strategic Innovation, which works to advance DEI initiatives across the university. NYU also committed to reviewing its own historical ties to slavery and segregation, — urther integrating social justice into its institutional mission. Academic programs — ocused on racial justice, such as the Center — or Black Visual Culture331 and the Department o — Social and Cultural Analysis,332 contribute to NYU’s role in — ostering intellectual discourse on these critical issues.

NYU’s engagement with global challenges extends to its commitment to sustainability and climate change. The university has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2040 and has implemented various sustainability initiatives, including reducing energy consumption and promoting environmentally responsible practices across its campuses.333 NYU’s — aculty and students are also actively involved in research on climate change, urban sustainability, and environmental justice, — urther cementing the university’s role as a leader in addressing global environmental issues.

In conclusion, NYU’s historical and contemporary involvement in socio-political a

airs underscores its intellectual and moral leadership in addressing both local and global

331 About CBVC IAAA, N.Y.U., https://cbvc.nyu.edu/about-cbvc-iaaa (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 332 About, N.Y.U. ARTS AND SCIENCE DEPT. SOC. CULTURAL ANALYSIS, https://as.nyu.edu/departments/sca/about.html (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 333 Andrew Hamilton, NYU’s Commitment, NYU, https://www.nyu.edu/about/university-initiatives/2040- now/nyu-s-commitment.html (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 79 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

challenges. From its early commitment to inclusivity and social justice to its recent initiatives — ocused on racial equity and sustainability, NYU continues to be a plat — orm — or public discourse and societal change. The university’s actions re — lect its ongoing dedication to — ostering a more just, inclusive, and sustainable — uture.

        a. NYU’s Initial Administrative Statement

New York University’s (NYU) initial administrative statement in response to to the events o

October 7 was led by President Linda Mills, who issued a statement expressing pro

ound sadness and concern over the violence in Israel and Gaza.334 The tone o — the statement was empathetic yet neutral, aimed at maintaining campus solidarity while recognizing the pain

elt by many members o — the university.335 Mills rea —

irmed NYU’s commitment to — ostering an inclusive environment — or all perspectives that must remain a place o — open discourse while also ensuring the sa — ety and well-being o — all our students. Immediate actions taken included bolstering mental health services and emphasizing the importance o — respect — ul dialogue during di —

icult times.336 Additionally, NYU reiterated its commitment to — ree speech, allowing — or student expression while calling — or thought — ul and constructive conversations.337

        b. NYU Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

A

ter the events o — October 7, student activism at New York University (NYU) intensi — ied, particularly through protests led by the NYU Palestine Solidarity Coalition. 338 Demonstrators called — or the university to divest — rom companies tied to Israel, such as those involved in de — ense contracting, including Lockheed Martin and General Electric. 339 The protests escalated when the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” was established on Gould

334 Evan Chesler and Linda G. Mills, Statement on Israel, NYU (Oct. 10, 2023), https://www.nyu.edu/about/leadership-university-administration/o —

ice-o — -the- president/comms/statement-on-israel.html. 335 Id. 336 See id. 337 See id. 338 Francesca Block, NYU’s Pro-Palestine Coalition Says it Supports ‘Armed Struggle’, THE FREE PRESS (Jul. 29, 2024), https://www.the — p.com/p/nyus-pro-palestine-coalition-says. 339 See Arwa Mahdawi, Why is New York University Making Protestors Watch the Simpsons as Punishment?, THE GUARDIAN (May 22, 2024), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/22/new-york- university-student-protesters. 80 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Plaza, which became the

ocal point o — these e —

orts. 340 Protesters demanded that NYU not only divest — rom these companies but also close its Tel Aviv study abroad program.341

On multiple occasions, the protests were met with a response

rom law en — orcement, with over 130 arrests made when police cleared the encampment.342 Despite the intensity o —

these protests, NYU’s administration, led by President Linda Mills, maintained a position o

neutrality on the issue o

divestment.343 The university emphasized that its investment policies were — ocused on maximizing returns — or its endowment to support the university’s educational mission, and that divestment would not be considered as part o — its — inancial strategy.344

NYU upheld its commitment to

ree speech, allowing the protests to take place within the boundaries o — campus policies, though the administration intervened when encampments and demonstrations violated sa — ety regulations.345 The tension between protestors and the administration continues, with students and — aculty pushing — or greater transparency and changes in the university’s — inancial involvement in companies tied to Israel.346

        c. Analysis o ---  NYU’s (Dis)Entanglement

Following the events o

October 7, NYU became a hotbed o — protests, with student activists, particularly — rom the NYU Palestine Solidarity Coalition, organizing demonstrations and calling — or divestment — rom companies with ties to Israel. 347 One o — the most notable protests involved the establishment o — the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” at Gould Plaza. This encampment, like similar ones across campuses nationwide, called — or the university to sever — inancial ties with companies pro — iting — rom Israel’s military actions and to shut down its study abroad program in Tel Aviv.348

The university’s response, led by President Linda Mills, was met with substantial controversy. NYU initially allowed the protests to continue under its — ree speech guidelines but took a stronger stance when the encampment became disruptive. Over 130 students

340 See id.; see also Qianqian Fan, Students Re — lect on NYU Campus Protests Against Israel, THE NYC DAILY POST (May 6, 2024), https://nycdailypost.com/2024/05/06/new-york/students-re — lect-nyu-campus-protests- against-israel/. 341 Naim Mousa, Inside NYU’s Generation-De — ining Protests — or Palestine, +972 MAGAZINE (Apr. 30, 2024), https://www.972mag.com/nyu-palestine-campus-protests/ 342 Id. 343 Adrianna Nehme & Dharma Niles, NYU Says It is Not Considering Divestment — rom Israel Amid Protests, WASHINGTON SQUARE NEWS (Apr. 25, 2024), https://nyunews.com/news/2024/04/25/israel-divertment- protests-continue/. 344 Id. 345 See, e.g., Madhawi, supra note 313. 346 Nehme & Niles, supra note 317. 347 See Block, supra note 312. 348 Mousa, supra note 315. 81 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

were arrested a

ter NYPD o —

icers were called to clear the encampment, leading to accusations that the university used excessive — orce to suppress student activism. 349 More than 5,000 alumni, led by the group NYU Alumni — or Justice in Palestine, signed a letter condemning the administration — or involving the police and demanding that the university meet the protesters’ calls — or divestment and boycott, as well as granting amnesty to arrested students.350

The national media’s reaction to NYU’s handling o

the situation was varied. While some outlets criticized the university’s decision to use law en — orcement, others noted the complexity o — maintaining order while respecting the students’ right to protest. Public intellectuals and lawmakers were divided, with some praising the university — or maintaining a balance between — ree speech and campus sa — ety, while others expressed disappointment at the perceived heavy-handed approach.

Despite the controversy and demands

or — urther action, there has been no major leadership turnover or resignations at NYU. However, the situation sparked an ongoing debate about the university’s role in navigating the balance between political activism, academic — reedom, and institutional neutrality on contentious global issues.

   11. Georgetown University

Georgetown University,

ounded in 1789 by John Carroll, is the oldest Catholic and Jesuit institution o — higher education in the United States. Located in Washington, D.C., Georgetown has long held a signi — icant place in American academic and political li — e due to its location and its religious and ethical mission. As a university grounded in Jesuit values, Georgetown has historically emphasized social justice, service to others, and the pursuit o — knowledge — or the betterment o — society. Over time, it has grown into a leading global research university with strong programs in international relations, law, and public policy, attracting students and scholars — rom around the world.

Georgetown has played a prominent role in several key socio-political movements throughout its history. During the Civil Rights Movement, Georgetown was a site o —

signi

icant student activism, with students and — aculty engaging in discussions on racial justice and organizing events to support desegregation. The university’s School o — Foreign Service, established in 1919, has long been a center — or discussions on global politics and

349 Id. 350 Open Letter to New York University Leadership, NYU Alumni — or Justice in Palestine, https://nyuajp.org/#:~:text=To%20Linda%20G.,and%20right — ully%20protesting%20this%20complicity.; Dharma Niles & Yezen Saadah, Over 5,000 Alumni Demand NYU Remove Police From Campus, Meet Protestors Demands, WASHINGTON SQUARE NEWS (May 5, 2024), https://nyunews.com/news/2024/05/05/nyu- alumni-demand-nypd-removal/ 82 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

international diplomacy, helping shape U.S.

oreign policy and contributing to public discourse on global governance. Georgetown’s Jesuit tradition o — social justice has also in — ormed its response to socio-political issues, leading the university to address historical injustices, including its ties to slavery. In 2016, Georgetown publicly acknowledged its involvement in the sale o — 272 enslaved people in 1838 to pay o —

university debts and has since committed to reparative measures, including scholarships — or descendants o — those enslaved.

In recent years, Georgetown has been actively involved in addressing contemporary social movements such as Black Lives Matter (BLM). Following the nationwide protests in 2020, the university launched several initiatives to address systemic racism and promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) across its community. Georgetown established the Racial Justice Institute, which serves as an interdisciplinary hub — or research on racial justice, social change, and public policy.351 The university has also implemented curriculum re — orms to include more courses — ocused on race, inequality, and social justice, re — lecting its commitment to — ostering an inclusive academic environment.

Georgetown’s commitment to addressing global challenges extends to its work on climate change and sustainability. The university has pledged to become carbon neutral by 2030 and has invested in sustainable campus initiatives such as energy e —

iciency projects, green buildings, and renewable energy sources.352 Through its Earth Commons Institute and its Global Futures Initiative, Georgetown engages in interdisciplinary research on climate change, sustainability, and environmental justice, working to contribute solutions to global environmental issues.353

In conclusion, Georgetown University’s intellectual and moral leadership is evident in its historical and contemporary engagements with socio-political challenges. From its involvement in the Civil Rights Movement to its recent initiatives addressing racial justice and sustainability, Georgetown continues to be a signi — icant — orce in shaping public discourse. Its commitment to social justice, in — ormed by its Jesuit values, positions Georgetown as a leading institution not only in academic excellence but also in addressing the pressing social and global challenges o — our time.

351 About Us, RACIAL JUST. INSTITUTE, https://rji.georgetown.edu/about-us/ (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 352 Georgetown Advances Commitment to Sustainability Through New Partnership Aimed at Reducing Energy Consumption, GEO. UNIV. (Apr. 5, 2021), https://www.georgetown.edu/news/georgetown-advances- commitment-to-sustainability-through-new-partnership-aimed-at-reducing-energy-consumption/. 353 About Us, THE EARTH COMMONS, https://earthcommons.georgetown.edu/about/ (last visited Sept. 28, 2024); Global Futures Initiative, GEO. UNIV., https://global — utures.georgetown.edu (last visited Sept. 28, 2024). 83 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

        a. Georgetown’s Initial Administrative Statement

Georgetown University’s initial administrative statement in response to the events o

October 7 was delivered by President John J. DeGioia. In his statement, DeGioia expressed deep concern over the violence in Israel and Gaza and emphasized the need — or unity and compassion within the Georgetown community.354 The tone was one o — empathy and re — lection, as he acknowledged the su —

ering caused by the con — lict. DeGioia emphasize how the community is called to support one another in moments o — pro — ound challenge, and he reiterated Georgetown’s commitment to — ostering respect — ul dialogue. Immediate actions included ensuring that mental health resources were available — or students and sta —

.355

        b. Georgetown Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, Georgetown University experienced a surge in student activism, particularly organized by Students — or Justice in Palestine (SJP) and a coalition o —

other campus groups, including Jewish Voices

or Peace (JVP) and Faculty and Sta —

or Justice in Palestine (FSJP).356 These groups organized a series o — protests and walkouts, calling — or Georgetown to divest its endowment — rom companies involved with the Israeli military, particularly those supplying technology used by the Israel De — ense Forces (IDF). 357 Speci — ic companies targeted included Google and Amazon, due to their involvement in providing cloud computing services to Israel through the $1.2 billion Project Nimbus.358

On October 26, students and

aculty held a walkout in Red Square, where speakers demanded accountability — rom the university — or what they perceived as Georgetown’s silence on Israel’s actions in Gaza.359 The rally also — ocused on calls — or divestment — rom companies that “support the Israeli state.”360 Protesters urged the university to take a stronger moral stance, asking Georgetown to adhere to its socially responsible investment policies.361

354 John J. DeGoia, A Message From President DeGoia on the Attacks in Israel, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY (Oct. 8, 2023), https://president.georgetown.edu/a-message- — rom-president-degioia-on-the-attacks-in-israel/. 355 Id. 356 Franziska Wild, et al., “Divest From Death”: Student Members Walkout to Demand Divestment From Corporations With Israeli Ties, THE GEORGETOWN VOICE (Feb. 9, 2024), https://georgetownvoice.com/2024/02/09/divest- — rom-death-community-members-walkout-to-demand- divestment- — rom-corporations-with-israeli-ties/. 357 Id. 358 Id. 359 Katherine Hawes & Sabrina Sha —

er, ‘Silence is Violence’, Students Demand University Action on Palestine, THE GEORGETOWN VOICE (Nov. 9, 2023), https://georgetownvoice.com/2023/11/09/silence-is- violence-students-demand-university-action-on-palestine/. 360 Id. 361 Wild, supra note 330. 84 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In response to the protests, Georgetown President John J. DeGioia initially released a statement condemning the October 7 attacks by Hamas, but his omission o — commentary on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza sparked criticism — rom the student body. 362 A — ter meeting with student leaders, DeGioia issued a second statement on October 19, which acknowledged the dignity o — Palestinian lives and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza but stopped short o — meeting the protesters’ demands — or divestment.363

Despite these e

orts, the university has so — ar maintained its neutral stance, citing the complexities o — international con — lict and the role o — its investments. Georgetown’s administration continued to meet with protest organizers, a —

irming its commitment to — ree speech while upholding university regulations concerning protest activities on campus. 364

       c. Analysis o ---  Georgetown’s (Dis)Entanglement

Georgetown University’s response to the protests and calls

or divestment a — ter the events o — October 7 sparked both criticism and support — rom the national public, media, and intellectual circles. Following the initial protests, which were largely organized by Students

or Justice in Palestine (SJP), students demanded that Georgetown divest — rom companies that supported Israel’s military actions and cease its perceived silence on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.365 The protests escalated with demonstrations on campus and a tent encampment at George Washington University, where Georgetown students joined

orces with other universities to ampli — y their demands.366

Georgetown’s administration, led by President John DeGioia, initially issued a statement condemning Hamas’ October 7 attack but — aced heavy criticism — rom student groups — or omitting any mention o — Palestinian casualties or the broader humanitarian crisis in Gaza.367 This omission triggered student walkouts and calls — or DeGioia to revise his statement. While he eventually released a second statement acknowledging the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and recognizing the “dignity” o — Palestinian lives, this did little to quell the protests, as SJP and other student organizations criticized the statement — or

ailing to explicitly condemn Israel’s actions or to commit to divestment.368

362 Hawes & Sha —

er, supra note 333. 363 John J. DeGoia, Re — lections on Community, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY (Oct. 19, 2023), https://president.georgetown.edu/re — lections-on-community-october-2023/; Hawes & Sha —

er, supra note 283. 364

365 Wild, supra note 330 366 Aamir Jamil & Maren Fagan, Georgetown Students Remain in Encampment A — ter Seven Days, Legislator’s Visit, THE HOYA (May 2, 2024), https://thehoya.com/uncategorized/georgetown-students-remain-in- encampment-a — ter-seven-days-legislators-visit/. 367 Hawes & Sha —

er, supra note 333. 368 Id. 85 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

The media response mirrored the divisions on campus, with some outlets criticizing Georgetown — or its neutral stance and re — usal to divest, while others praised the university’s care — ul balancing o —

ree speech and institutional neutrality. Public intellectuals weighed in as well, with some praising the university — or — ostering dialogue, while others, particularly — rom pro-Palestinian groups, argued that the administration’s response lacked moral clarity.

Georgetown

aced growing national scrutiny, including — rom alumni and government o —

icials, though the university avoided the more severe congressional oversight that institutions like Harvard and the University o — Pennsylvania — aced. Georgetown’s handling o — the situation was seen as moderate, allowing protests to continue while not — ully committing to student demands,369 a strategy that enabled the administration to avoid major leadership turnover or resignations. However, the ongoing tension between — ree speech rights, student activism, and university policy continues to be a — ocal point at Georgetown, re — lecting broader national conversations about the role o — universities in handling contentious geopolitical issues.

       12. University o ---  New Hampshire

The University o

New Hampshire (UNH), — ounded in 1866 as the New Hampshire College o — Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts, is the state’s — lagship public research university. Originally established as part o — the land-grant system, UNH has played a key role in providing access to higher education, advancing agricultural and mechanical arts, and promoting public service and research throughout New Hampshire. Over the years, it has expanded its academic o —

erings and grown into a comprehensive research institution, with strengths in areas like environmental sciences, business, and public policy.

UNH has been involved in signi

icant socio-political movements throughout its history. During the Vietnam War era, as on many American campuses, students at UNH organized protests and demonstrations against U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia. This period marked a shi — t toward greater political activism at the university, as students engaged with broader national conversations about civil rights, social justice, and governance. The university has maintained an ongoing commitment to public discourse, emphasizing civic responsibility and engagement as core values o — its educational mission.

In recent years, UNH has responded to contemporary social movements, particularly the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Following the 2020 protests against police brutality and systemic racism, UNH launched several initiatives aimed at addressing racial

369 See id. 86 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

inequality and promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within the university community. UNH — ormed the President’s Task Force on Campus Climate, which works to assess and improve the campus environment — or underrepresented students, — aculty, and sta —

. Additionally, the university has enhanced DEI programming, expanded scholarships

or students — rom underrepresented backgrounds, and committed to diversi — ying its

aculty.

UNH is also deeply engaged in addressing global challenges such as climate change and sustainability. The university has set ambitious sustainability goals, including a commitment to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030. UNH is home to the Sustainability Institute, which promotes research, education, and community engagement on environmental issues. The university has received national recognition — or its sustainability e —

orts, including being one o — the — irst in the U.S. to use land — ill gas as a renewable energy source — or campus operations. UNH’s research in areas like marine sciences, agriculture, and environmental engineering re — lects its broader contributions to solving global environmental problems.

In conclusion, the University o

New Hampshire’s intellectual and moral leadership can be seen in its historical role in socio-political movements and its contemporary e —

orts to address critical issues such as racial justice and climate change. UNH continues to emphasize civic responsibility, public service, and environmental stewardship, re — lecting its commitment to both academic excellence and social responsibility. Through its engagement in both local and global challenges, UNH has maintained its relevance as an important institution in shaping public discourse and — ostering positive social change.

       a. UNH’s Initial Administrative Statement

The University o

New Hampshire (UNH) responded to the events o — October 7 with a statement — rom President James W. Dean Jr., expressing sorrow and concern — or the violence in Israel and Gaza. Dean emphasized the university’s commitment to supporting all members o — the UNH community, stating, “Our thoughts are with those a —

ected by this tragic con — lict.” The tone o — the statement was empathetic and — ocused on unity, with a reminder o — the availability o — counseling and mental health services — or students. No political stance was taken, and the university emphasized — ostering an environment o —

open dialogue.

                                       87 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

        b. UNH Campus Protests and Calls  --- or Divestment

Following the events o

October 7, the University o — New Hampshire (UNH) became a site

or signi — icant student activism, with calls — or divestment — rom companies tied to Israel. 370 The protests, led by the UNH Palestine Solidarity Coalition (PSC) and supported by other campus organizations like the Muslim Student Association and the Black Student Union, gathered at Thompson Hall Lawn to demand that the university disclose its investments and divest — rom Israeli-based companies, including de — ense contractors such as Elbit Systems and Sig Sauer.371 Protesters — ramed their demands as both a response to the ongoing con — lict in Gaza and as a broader human rights issue, calling — or immediate action

rom the administration.

UNH’s administration, however, did not adopt the protesters’ demands. University spokesperson Tania deLuzuriaga responded that approximately 0.5% o — UNH’s $475 million endowment is invested in Israeli companies. 372 She — urther noted that divesting

rom these companies could impact the university’s research and student services, emphasizing that the university’s mission and — inancial strategies would not align with the divestment requests.373

The protest included a diverse array o

voices, including pro — essors like Joshua Meyrowitz, who criticized Israel’s actions and called — or a cease — ire in Gaza, highlighting that these actions should not be viewed as representative o — all Jewish people.374 Students expressed

rustration with the administration’s lack o — response, — eeling that their voices and concerns were not being adequately addressed by university leadership.375

        c. Analysis o ---  UNH (Dis)Entanglement

The University o

New Hampshire (UNH) — aced signi — icant protests — ollowing the events o —

October 7, with student groups, including the Palestinian Solidarity Coalition, demanding the university divest — rom Israeli-based companies.376 These protests took place on

370 Abigail Driscoll, “DEFUND, DISCLOSE, DIVEST”: Protestors Urge UNH to Pull Funding From Israel, THE NEW HAMPSHIRE (Apr. 30, 2024), https://tnhdigital.com/23261/uncategorized/de — und-disclose-divest-protestors- urge-unh-to-pull- — unding- — rom-israel/. 371 Id. 372 Olivia Richardson, Students Demand That UNH Divest From Israeli Companies, NEW HAMPSHIRE PUBLIC RADIO (Apr. 26, 2024), https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2024-04-26/students-demand-unh-to-divest- — rom- israeli-companies. 373 Id. 374 Nancy West, About 100 People Arrested at Pro-Palestine Rallies at Dartmouth and UNH, IN DEPTH NH (May 2, 2024), https://indepthnh.org/2024/05/02/about-100-people-arrested-at-pro-palestine-rallies-at- dartmouth-and-unh/ 375 Driscoll, supra note 344. 376 Id. 88 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Thompson Hall Lawn, with participants calling

or transparency in UNH’s investments and questioning the institution’s — inancial priorities.377 UNH spokesperson Tania deLuzuriaga stated that approximately 0.5% o — the university’s $475 million endowment was tied to Israeli companies and that divestment would a —

ect research and student services. 378 Despite these protests, UNH did not pursue divestment, maintaining that it was inconsistent with the university’s mission.379

Nationally, the university’s response was seen as measured, with no major leadership turnover resulting — rom the protests. The administration upheld — ree speech while de — ending its — inancial decisions. Critics, including students and some — aculty, argued that the administration’s neutral stance on the con — lict showed a lack o — moral clarity, but no signi — icant national or congressional oversight was reported.380 The protests at UNH re — lect broader trends in the national divestment movement, with similar calls taking place on campuses across the U.S., but without the same levels o —

allout as seen at institutions like Harvard or Penn.

  C. Summary o ---  Key Findings  --- rom Case Study This table summarizes the disentanglement actions taken by twelve universities, the ethical  --- rameworks applied, key legal/ --- inancial implications, and the outcomes o ---  these decisions. It provides a comparative view o ---  how universities navigate complex ethical and

inancial considerations.

                                                                                     Outcome  University        Ethical Framework           Consistency    Key Outcomes               Quality
                                                          Donor backlash, negative
               Utilitarianism ( --- ocus on                   press, enrollment
               maximizing donor                           decline, and president's
               interests), Rawlsian                       resignation; signi --- icant  Harvard           Justice (occasional                        reputational and  University        appeals to equity).         Inconsistent    --- inancial harm.            Negative
                                                          President resigned a --- ter
                                                          criticism, donor
           Utilitarianism (situational                    withdrawals, and  --- ederal  University o ---  changes in response to                         scrutiny; severe  Pennsylvania external pressures).             Inconsistent   reputational harm.         Negative

377 Id. 378 Richardson, supra note 346. 379 Id. 380 See, e.g., West, supra note 348. 89 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

                                                                                     Outcome  University      Ethical Framework             Consistency    Key Outcomes               Quality
                                                          $100 million donation
             Virtue Ethics (adherence                     received,  --- ollowed
             to Chicago Principles),                      Chicago Principles
             Deontological Ethics                         consistently;  University o ---    (principled stance on  --- ree                   reputational challenges  Chicago         expression).                  Consistent     mitigated.                 Positive
                                                          Administrative
                                                          resignations, legal
                                                          challenges, and public
             Utilitarianism                               criticism over protest
             (inconsistent applications                   management; severe  Columbia        to satis --- y various                           reputational and legal  University      stakeholders).                Inconsistent   issues.                    Negative
                                                          National scrutiny,
                                                          lawsuits related to
                                                          antisemitism, and
             Rawlsian Justice                             delayed response
             (appealed to  --- airness                        criticisms; signi --- icant
             inconsistently across                        reputational and legal  UCLA            di ---

erent incidents). Inconsistent harm. Negative Utilitarianism (shi — ting Antisemitic incidents, responses to manage legal risks, and media Cornell antisemitism and scrutiny; serious University stakeholder demands). Inconsistent reputational harm. Negative Backlash a — ter congressional testimony, perceived Deontological Ethics inconsistencies in (emphasis on institutional managing protests; MIT autonomy). Inconsistent reputational harm. Negative Mixed (Utilitarianism — or balancing di —

erent Inconsistent responses interests, Deontological to divestment and Stan — ord Ethics — or maintaining antisemitism incidents; University autonomy). Inconsistent reputational challenges. Negative

                                                          Criticism  --- or handling
             Utilitarianism (e ---

orts to divestment calls and Princeton minimize harm to di —

erent Mixed campus sa — ety; minor University groups). Approach reputational harm. Mixed

                                          90 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

                                                                                                Outcome  University         Ethical Framework                    Consistency    Key Outcomes                Quality
                                                                    Struggled with handling
                Mixed (Utilitarianism  --- or                           antisemitism and
                addressing di ---

erent divestment calls; NYU stakeholder concerns). Inconsistent reputational harm. Negative

                                                                    Criticized  --- or handling
                Utilitarianism (e ---

orts to antisemitic incidents and Georgetown balance — ree speech and divestment protests; University sa — ety concerns). Inconsistent a —

ected public image. Negative Mixed (Utilitarianism — or managing student Minor disruptions due to University o — activism, Deontological student activism; New Ethics — or institutional maintained a stable Hampshire policies). Consistent overall situation. Mixed Table 3. University (Dis)Entanglment a — ter October 7.

Reviewing the chart, several key trends emerge. The analysis o

university responses reveals a correlation between the ethical — rameworks employed and the outcomes experienced. Institutions that adhered to a consistent ethical approach, particularly those grounded in virtue ethics or deontological principles, generally navigated the challenges with more — avorable results. By contrast, universities that adopted a utilitarian stance, o — ten shi — ting their ethical reasoning to accommodate di —

erent stakeholder interests, saw more negative consequences, especially when those shi — ts appeared inconsistent or reactive.

D. Consistency as a Key Determinant Universities that applied their chosen ethical  --- rameworks consistently, such as the University o ---  Chicago, which adhered to the Chicago Principles, tended to achieve better outcomes. Chicago's principled stance on  --- ree expression, rooted in virtue ethics and deontological obligations to uphold academic  --- reedom, not only mitigated reputational risks but also attracted substantial  --- inancial support, including a $100 million donation. This case illustrates that a coherent ethical approach can enhance institutional credibility and stability during periods o ---  turmoil. Similarly, the University o ---  New Hampshire maintained a consistent stance in balancing  --- ree speech and student activism, resulting in only minor disruptions and preserving the university’s overall stability.

In contrast, institutions with inconsistent applications o

their ethical principles — aced signi — icant — allout. For example, Columbia University and UCLA vacillated in their responses to antisemitism and campus sa — ety, attempting to balance con — licting stakeholder demands without a steady guiding principle. This inconsistency weakened 91 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

their positions, leading to administrative resignations, legal challenges, and severe reputational harm. When ethical — rameworks are applied inconsistently, stakeholders perceive actions as opportunistic or unprincipled, eroding trust and exacerbating con — lict.

E. The Challenges o

Utilitarianism Utilitarianism, which seeks to maximize bene — its — or the greatest number, proved particularly challenging to apply e —

ectively in the context o — university governance during crises. Institutions like Harvard and Cornell — requently adjusted their ethical justi — ications to appease di —

erent groups, including students, — aculty, and donors. While utilitarian reasoning may o —

er — lexibility in addressing diverse interests, its situational nature o — ten led to incoherent responses. For these universities, shi — ting ethical justi — ications were perceived as attempts to placate the most vocal or in — luential stakeholders at the expense o — principled decision-making, resulting in donor backlash, — ederal scrutiny, and declining enrollment.

The negative outcomes associated with utilitarianism were most pronounced when universities — ailed to apply the — ramework consistently. The — requent recalibration o —

ethical rationales based on situational pressures, rather than adherence to a core set o

values, created the impression that the institutions lacked a genuine commitment to any particular moral stance. This approach not only — ueled criticism but also exposed the universities to legal risks and — inancial harm.

F. Mixed Approaches Yield Mixed Results Some universities employed a mixed approach, combining elements o — utilitarianism and deontological ethics or switching between ethical — rameworks depending on the situation. For instance, Stan — ord and Princeton navigated their responses to the October 7 events with varying degrees o —

lexibility, attempting to reconcile demands — or campus sa — ety, — ree expression, and divestment. While this approach helped these institutions avoid some o —

the severe consequences

aced by their peers, it did not o —

er the same level o — protection as a consistent and principled stance. Mixed approaches yielded mixed outcomes, suggesting that while — lexibility in ethical reasoning can be bene — icial in certain contexts, it also carries risks when stakeholders perceive it as a lack o — commitment to core values.

G. Normative Implications

or University Governance The relationship between ethical — rameworks and outcomes in the case studies highlights the importance o — consistency in institutional governance. Universities that commit to a coherent set o — ethical principles—whether grounded in virtue ethics, deontological obligations, or a strategically applied utilitarian — ramework—are better positioned to manage con — licts and mitigate reputational harm. In contrast, institutions that — luctuate in 92 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

their ethical reasoning or apply

rameworks inconsistently may — ind themselves more vulnerable to backlash, legal challenges, and — inancial losses. The data underscores the need — or universities to articulate and adhere to a clear ethical — ramework, particularly during times o — crisis, as a means o — sa — eguarding their long-term reputation and stability.

V. Normative Foundations o

University Disentanglement This Part serves as the culmination o — the paper’s analysis by grounding the case studies and observations in a coherent ethical — ramework. Building on the empirical — indings about inconsistent or principled responses in Part IV, this section establishes the ethical principles that universities should adopt when navigating con — licts and pressures — or disentanglement. It aims to provide a normative basis that not only explains the successes and — ailures identi — ied in the case studies but also o —

ers a roadmap — or institutions to align their actions with their core values. By articulating a principled approach to ethical decision-making, this Part completes the paper’s argument by proposing standards — or universities to — ollow, ensuring that — uture responses to crises are guided by a commitment to justice, autonomy, and the long-term mission o — higher education.

   A. Introduction to Normative Theories in Disentanglement Universities, as ethical and intellectual stewards, occupy a unique place in society. They are entrusted with  --- ostering critical thinking, advancing societal wel --- are, and upholding values o ---  justice and  --- airness. Yet, when con --- ronted with calls  --- or boycotts or divestment, universities  --- ace challenging normative questions: Should they act based on a duty to protect human rights? Or should they maximize the wel --- are o ---  their entire academic community, balancing con --- licting interests and values?

In this part, I propose to evaluate university disentanglement decisions through the lens o

established moral theories—utilitarianism, deontological ethics, virtue ethics, and Rawlsian justice. These normative — rameworks o —

er pro — ound insights into how universities should navigate the complex terrain o — moral responsibility, public accountability, and institutional autonomy. By applying these philosophical principles, we can better understand the ethical obligations that universities — ace when aligning their actions with their societal role.

   B. Utilitarianism and Consequentialism One o ---  the most in --- luential  --- rameworks in moral philosophy is utilitarianism, particularly as articulated by John Stuart Mill.381 Utilitarianism evaluates the morality o ---  actions based on their outcomes, proposing that the ethically right decision is the one that produces the

381 See John Stuart Mill, UTILITARIANISM, 8-37 (1863) (introducing the theory o — utilitarianism). 93 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

greatest good

or the greatest number o — people.382 For universities, this approach suggests that disentanglement decisions—such as divesting — rom — ossil — uels or companies implicated in human rights abuses—should be assessed in terms o — their net bene — it to society, even i — these decisions come with immediate — inancial costs.383

Under a utilitarian lens, university governance is tasked with balancing con

licting interests: the need to maintain — inancial stability versus the moral imperative to promote social wel — are. Consider, — or instance, the — ossil — uel divestment movement. Universities that choose to divest — rom — ossil — uels may — ace short-term — inancial losses, as these industries o — ten provide lucrative returns on investment. However, the long-term societal bene — its—such as reducing environmental harm, combating climate change, and setting a precedent — or responsible investing—may outweigh these immediate costs.

Mill’s utilitarianism also compels universities to consider the global and long-term impacts o — their decisions.384 Divesting — rom — ossil — uels could inspire other institutions to

ollow suit, leading to widespread environmental bene — its. On the other hand, maintaining investments in environmentally harm — ul industries might exacerbate the global climate crisis, ultimately harming — uture generations. A utilitarian — ramework would argue that universities have a moral obligation to prioritize the greater societal good over short-term institutional gain, especially given their unique role as thought leaders in shaping — uture policy and ethical standards.385

For example, institutions such as Stan

ord University and the University o — Cali — ornia system have made headlines — or their divestment — rom — ossil — uels, citing ethical obligations to — uture generations.386 Early data on their — inancial per — ormance — ollowing

382 Id. at 9-10 (“The creed which accepts as the — oundation o — morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to reverse happiness.”); Jeremy Bentham, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF MORALS AND LEGISLATION 2-3 (1907). 383 This articulation o — utilitarianism — inds support in the work o — Peter Singer, who proposed that it is a moral imperative to give charitably to end world poverty until doing so would require you to sacri — ice something nearly as important as that which you are preventing. Peter Singer, THE LIFE YOU CAN SAVE 15 (2009). 384 See John Stuart Mill, UTILITARIANISM 16-17 (1863) (explaining that utilitarianism is not concerned with the individual agent’s maximization o — happiness, but with the absolute maximization o — happiness — or society as a whole). 385 Id.; See also citation and accompanying text supra note 357. 386 Board o — Trustees Commits to Accelerating Transition to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Reports Major Reduction in Fossil Fuel Investments, STANFORD REPORT (Jun. 12, 202) https://news.stan — ord.edu/stories/2020/06/trustees-commit-accelerating-transition-to-net-zero- greenhouse-gas-emissions (reporting Stan — ord’s 90% reduction in investment in — ossil — uel companies); Leah Asmelash, The University o — Cali — ornia Has Fully Divested From Fossil Fuels. It’s the Largest School in the US to Do It. CNN (May 20, 202 4:03 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/20/us/university-o — -cali — ornia-divest-

ossil- — uels-trnd/index.html. 94 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

divestment reveals minimal

inancial disruption, rein — orcing the argument that universities can both prioritize social responsibility and maintain — inancial health.

However, utilitarian ethics also raises complex challenges

or universities. How do they measure and compare the consequences o — their actions — or various stakeholders?387 Universities must weigh the potential harm o —

inancial losses to students, sta —

, and research programs against the societal good that comes — rom aligning their investments with ethical principles. This balancing act illustrates the nuanced role that universities play as both — inancial entities and moral actors in a globalized world.

By adopting a utilitarian approach, universities can justi

y their disentanglement decisions not merely as symbolic gestures, but as part o — a broader e —

ort to maximize societal well- being. Ultimately, this — ramework encourages universities to act with an eye toward the collective good, even i — doing so requires sacri — ices in other areas o — their operations.

  C. Deontological Ethics and Duty-Bound Decisions In contrast to utilitarianism’s  --- ocus on consequences, deontological ethics, associated with Immanuel Kant, argues that actions are morally right or wrong based on adherence to duties or principles, regardless o ---  the outcomes.388 For universities, this  --- ramework suggests that disentanglement decisions—such as divestment  --- rom companies complicit in human rights violations—should be guided by ethical principles rather than a balance o ---

costs and bene

its. I — every university adopted a policy o — divesting — rom human rights violations, it would create a universal precedent that upholds justice and morality globally. Universities would thus position themselves as bastions o — moral leadership, not only in academia but across societal governance, upholding the categorical imperative to act in ways that promote universal moral laws.

Kant’s categorical imperative o

ers a compelling lens through which to view university decision-making. According to Kant, moral actors should act only according to rules that they would want to become universal laws.389 In the context o — university divestment, this means that universities should ask: What i — every university divested — rom companies violating human rights? Would this promote a just and moral society? I — the answer is yes, then divestment becomes a moral duty, not a choice. This is particularly relevant — or universities that position themselves as de — enders o — human rights and social justice.

387 See note 358 supra. The need to maximize happiness across multiple di —

erent groups necessitates a balancing o — the relative increase and decrease to each constituent — lowing — rom each action. 388 Immanuel Kant, PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY 54-55 (Mary Gregor ed. 1996); see also F.M. Kamm, INTRICATE ETHICS, 237-242 (2007) (discussing the role o — rights and duties in shaping our obligations to act or re — rain — rom acting in society). 389 Immanuel Kant, PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY 57 (Mary Gregor ed. 1996). 95 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

A Kantian

ramework would compel universities to sever — inancial ties with unethical corporations, not because o —

inancial gain or loss, but because it is the morally right thing to do based on the principle o — justice.390 This duty-bound approach is more concerned with upholding moral principles than calculating consequences.391 For example, i — a university recognizes that its investments contribute to environmental harm or human exploitation, Kantian ethics would demand that the university divest, even i — doing so leads to — inancial strain.

By

ocusing on the principles o — justice and — airness, deontological ethics provides universities with a clear mandate to act according to their ethical commitments, rein — orcing their role as moral leaders in society.

    1. Duty vs. Consequence in Disentanglement Decisions

In cases where universities

ace pressure to disengage — rom entities associated with unethical behavior—such as — ossil — uel companies or regimes with poor human rights records—deontological ethics would dictate that these institutions have a duty to re — use complicity in such unethical activities.392 Even i — divestment might result in — inancial losses or controversy, the ethical principle o — not supporting unjust practices would take precedence over utilitarian concerns about maximizing the wel — are o — the majority. 393

This

ramework can also be applied to questions o — academic — reedom and inclusivity. For example, a university might have a duty to protect — ree speech on campus, even i — certain

orms o — expression are controversial or lead to protests. The principle here is that upholding academic — reedom is a — undamental duty, one that should not be compromised even when the consequences may be divisive or disruptive.

Deontological ethics also provides a moral check against actions that are purely pragmatic. While utilitarianism might justi — y withholding action i — it would harm the institution’s — inancial stability, deontological ethics insists that universities must act according to ethical principles, irrespective o — potential losses. 394 For instance, i — a university recognizes that continuing — inancial ties with a — ossil — uel company violates its commitment to environmental justice, deontological ethics would require divestment as a duty, not a choice.

390 Id. at 54-55 391 Id. at 55 (“That the purposes we may have — or our actions, and the their e —

ects as ends and incentives o —

the will, an give actions no unconditional and moral worth is clear

rom what has gone be — ore.”). 392 See id. at 57. 393 Immanuel Kant, PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY 55 (Mary Gregor ed. 1996). 394 Id. 96 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    2. Moral Absolutism and Institutional Integrity

A key strength o

deontological ethics is its alignment with the moral absolutism expected o — universities. Society o — ten holds academic institutions to higher moral standards, expecting them to operate as ethical exemplars. Universities, under this view, should act as moral leaders, demonstrating integrity even when — aced with challenging trade-o —

s. Acting based on duty ensures that universities maintain their moral authority, a crucial component o — their institutional identity.395

However, deontological ethics can also present signi

icant practical challenges — or universities. Adhering to moral absolutes may lead to di —

icult situations where acting according to duty con — licts with the interests o — certain stakeholders. For example, a university’s duty to divest — rom corporations involved in human rights violations could result in the alienation o — donors or partnerships, which may have repercussions — or student opportunities and research — unding. Nonetheless, deontological ethics maintains that these challenges should not deter universities — rom — ul — illing their moral duties.

    3. A Duty-Based Framework  --- or University Governance

Deontological ethics o

ers a clear, principled approach to university governance, one that prioritizes ethical duty over consequences. For universities, this means that decisions about boycotts and divestment must be grounded in an unwavering commitment to moral principles such as justice, — airness, and respect — or human rights. In practice, this

ramework requires universities to engage in sel — -re — lection: Are their current practices aligned with the ethical duties they pro — ess to uphold? I — not, deontological ethics would demand that they take corrective action, regardless o — the potential — inancial or reputational consequences.396

Ultimately, a duty-based approach to university disentanglement serves as a sa

eguard against ethical compromise, ensuring that institutions remain morally consistent, even in the — ace o — external pressures. By acting according to ethical principles rather than outcomes, universities can preserve their integrity and continue to serve as moral beacons within society.

With deontological ethics outlined, we’ve established how universities might act out o

duty, regardless o

the consequences. Next, we can delve into Virtue Ethics and

395 Charles W. Anderson, Prescribing the Li — e o — the Mind: An Essay on the Purpose o — the University, the Aims o — Liberal Education, the Competence o — Citizens, and the Cultivation o — Practical Reason 32-34 (1993) (discussing the moral responsibility o — universities to serve as ethical exemplars, emphasizing the expectation that higher education institutions adhere to principles o — integrity and act as moral leaders, particularly in times o — societal ethical dilemmas). 396 Immanuel Kant, PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY 55 (Mary Gregor ed. 1996). 97 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Institutional Character, exploring how universities’ actions re

lect their moral character and contribute to institutional integrity.

  D. Virtue Ethics and Institutional Character While both utilitarianism and deontological ethics  --- ocus on outcomes and duties, virtue ethics, associated with Aristotle, emphasizes the importance o ---  cultivating moral character through actions.397 Universities are expected to act as moral exemplars within society, embodying virtues such as integrity, courage, and justice. In the context o ---

university disentanglement, virtue ethics asks what kind o

institution the university wants to be—an institution that makes ethically sound decisions, or one that prioritizes — inancial interests over moral integrity.398

Universities can cultivate these virtues through their actions. For example, by choosing to divest — rom industries that cause harm—such as — ossil — uel companies or those complicit in human rights abuses—universities demonstrate courage in the — ace o —

inancial or political pressure. Similarly, integrity is demonstrated when a university’s actions align with its stated values, such as sustainability or social justice.399 Acting consistently with these virtues enhances the university’s reputation as an ethical leader and — osters a culture o — moral responsibility.400 Just as individuals cultivate virtues through repeated moral actions, universities establish their moral character through consistent decisions that align with ethical values.401 Institutions like Harvard University, with its long-standing leadership on social issues, exempli — y how acting with courage and integrity can rein — orce a university’s identity as a leader in ethical governance.

Aristotle’s virtue ethics also suggests that moral actions must be practiced repeatedly to

orm good habits.402 For universities, this means that ethical decision-making should not be isolated to one-o —

actions like divestment, but rather should be integrated into the university’s ongoing governance and institutional identity. By making decisions that re — lect moral character, universities rein — orce their commitment to being institutions o — virtue and leadership.

397 See Aristotle, NICOMACHEAN ETHICS 31 (Roger Crisp ed. 2014) (noting that virtue is conscious action directed to the “mean” or the middle ground between the vice o — excess and that o — de — iciency in any given area o — li — e). 398 See id. at 40-42 (discussing the concept o — rational choice and the obligation agents to decide rationally (that is, without re — erence to appetite — or pleasure) whether to act “good” or “bad” thereby choosing either virtue or vice). 399 See Alasdair MacIntyre, AFTER VIRTUE, 198-245 (3d ed. 2007) (exploring the concept o — Aristotelian virtue ethics, particularly the signi — icance o — constancy or integrity–acting with consistency to avoid hypocrisy) 400 See id. 401 See id. 402 See id.; Aristotle, NICOMACHEAN ETHICS, 71–73 (H. Rackham ed. 2014). 98 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    1. Integrity and Moral Consistency

At the core o

virtue ethics is the idea o — integrity—the alignment o — values and actions.403 Universities that cultivate virtue act with integrity when their external actions re — lect their internal values.404 For example, i — a university publicly champions sustainability and environmental justice, yet continues to invest in — ossil — uel companies, this would be a

ailure o — integrity. Virtue ethics would urge the university to divest, not simply because it is morally right in an abstract sense, but because such an action would align with the institution’s core values, demonstrating consistency between belie — and practice.

By

ostering moral consistency, universities build trust with their communities and maintain their reputations as ethical institutions.405 Acting with integrity enhances the credibility o — the university’s mission and rein — orces its role as a leader in societal moral discourse. This alignment between values and actions is crucial in cultivating trust, respect, and admiration — rom both internal stakeholders—students, — aculty, and sta —

— and external ones, including the broader community.

    2. Courage in the Face o ---  Opposition

A second key virtue in the context o

university disentanglement is courage.406 Universities o — ten — ace signi — icant pressures — rom power — ul stakeholders, including alumni, donors, corporate partners, and political groups. Virtue ethics argues that universities should have the courage to act in accordance with their ethical convictions, even when these actions might provoke backlash or — inancial loss. Courage involves standing — irm on principle, even in the — ace o — adversity.407

Take,

or example, the divestment movement against apartheid South A — rica. Universities that chose to divest — rom companies operating in South A — rica did so at a time when such actions were politically controversial and — inancially costly.408 Nonetheless, these universities demonstrated courage, aligning their actions with the moral imperative to

403 See Aristotle, supra note 370, at 75 (noting that the mean between boast — ulness and sel — -deprecation (that which we would call integrity) consists o — being truth — ul regarding one’s attributes—anything less is to — ail to be a person o — integrity). 404 Id. 405 Aristotle would say that the person who has integrity lives their entire lives pursuing truth, and a clear byproduct o — this is a relationship o — greater trust with one’s community. Id. 406 See Aristotle, supra note 375 at 77. 407 See id. (“And so with Courage: we become brave by training ourselves to despise and endure terrors, and we shall be best able to endure terrors when we have become brave.”) 408 See discussion supra Part III.D. 99 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

oppose racial oppression.409 Virtue ethics holds that it is precisely in moments o

tension and opposition that the true moral character o — an institution is revealed.

In modern contexts, such as the movement to divest

rom — ossil — uels or to boycott companies linked to oppressive regimes, the same principle applies. Universities are called upon to show courage by disentangling themselves — rom unethical — inancial relationships, even when doing so may harm their endowments or alienate in — luential donors. By cultivating this virtue, universities become exemplars o — moral — ortitude, setting a standard — or ethical decision-making in complex and contested spaces.

    3. Justice and Fairness in Institutional Decisions

Justice, another central virtue, calls on universities to treat all stakeholders with

airness and respect.410 In the context o — disentanglement, this means ensuring that decisions are not only aligned with institutional values but also considerate o — the broader social impact.411 Universities must ask themselves whether their — inancial and operational decisions promote a just society. For instance, i — a university chooses to maintain — inancial ties with companies that contribute to environmental degradation or human rights abuses, it could be seen as perpetuating injustice.412

Virtue ethics demands that universities act in ways that promote

airness and equity, not only within their own institutions but in their interactions with the global community. 413 This could involve prioritizing justice in their divestment strategies by severing ties with entities that disproportionately harm vulnerable populations or exacerbate inequalities. By embodying the virtue o — justice, universities a —

irm their commitment to the broader social good and demonstrate leadership in creating a more equitable world.

409 Id. 410 See John Stuart Mill, UTILITARIANISM, 61–95 (1863) (exploring the virtue o — justice, which includes giving one what is due and respecting the rights o — others) 411 See id. 412 See id. at 65-66 (explaining that justice commands that one should receive good or evil as is his due, and that it is unjust that one should act evilly toward one not deserving o — this, with clear applications to promoting environmental degradation that will impact all o — humanity — or the pro — it o — a single institution). 413 Aristotle, supra note 370, at 82-83 (noting that injustice is any — orm o — bad conduct done — or personal gain as opposed to done out o — weakness to the impulses o — the — lesh—as applied here this takes the — orm o —

investing in industries that harm marginalized communities, not motivated by some pleasure derived

rom causing harm but rather — rom a desire — or the — inancial gain that — lows — rom the investment). 100 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    4. Wisdom in Navigating Complex Moral Terrain

Virtue ethics also highlights the importance o

wisdom, or practical reasoning, in making moral decisions.414 Universities operate in highly complex environments, balancing

inancial sustainability, academic — reedom, and social responsibility. Virtue ethics argues that moral wisdom—the ability to navigate these complexities with discernment and balance—is a key characteristic o — an ethical institution.415

Wisdom, in this context, involves recognizing the nuances o

disentanglement decisions, understanding that not all moral dilemmas have clear-cut solutions. For example, universities may — ace con — licting pressures when deciding whether to divest — rom certain industries. While disengaging — rom — ossil — uel companies may be the morally virtuous choice — or environmental reasons, universities must also consider the potential impacts on their research — unding, — inancial aid resources, and long-term sustainability.

In these situations, virtue ethics encourages universities to exercise practical wisdom, making decisions that re — lect thought — ul consideration o — both moral principles and pragmatic realities.416 A virtuous university will care — ully weigh the ethical implications o —

its actions, striving to strike a balance that upholds its values while ensuring its ability to continue serving its educational mission.

    5. Cultivating Institutional Virtue

Ultimately, virtue ethics calls on universities to see themselves as moral agents, capable o — cultivating and demonstrating virtues in their governance and decision-making processes.417 This ethical — ramework encourages universities to re — lect on the kind o —

institutions they aspire to be and to make decisions that embody their commitment to moral excellence.

414 Aristotle identi — ied three — orms o — wisdom in his work, NICOMACHEAN ETHICS, these being scienti — ic knowledge, practical wisdom, and wisdom proper. Here we deal with what he would have called practical wisdom, which to him was an understanding o — the proper course o — conduct in order — or the person to live well. And he would have applied this as well to the broader sense o — the person, that being the community as a whole. This has clear applications to the university, tasked with promoting ethical conduct and general wellbeing, not only within its institutional community, but also within the broader society. Aristotle, supra note 322, at 103-105; Michael C. Legaspi & Ryan Hanley, Wisdom and Tradition: Aristotle, UNIV. CHI. CTR. PRAC. WISDOM (Apr. 6, 2010), https://wisdomcenter.uchicago.edu/news/discussions/wisdom-and-tradition- aristotle. 415 Aristotle, supra note 370, at 105-106 416 See source and accompanying text supra note 387. Aristotle would have contrasted this ‘particularized’ or pragmatic wisdom, which deals with the li — e o — man in particular contexts, with the broader sense o — wisdom that “is scienti — ic knowledge, combined with [understanding why the situation is as it is], o — what is by nature most [honorable].” Id. at 107. 417 See Aristotle, supra note 370. 101 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

By acting with integrity, courage, justice, and wisdom, universities not only

ul — ill their role as centers o — learning and knowledge but also become exemplars o — ethical leadership in society. Through the lens o — virtue ethics, disentanglement is not merely a — inancial or operational decision—it is an opportunity to demonstrate moral character, setting a standard — or both academic and societal ethics.

  E. Rawlsian Justice and Institutional Fairness John Rawls’ theory o ---  justice o ---

ers a compelling — ramework — or evaluating university disentanglement decisions through the principles o —

airness and equality. Central to Rawls’ theory is the concept o — the veil o — ignorance, where decision-makers are asked to make choices without knowing their own position in society.418 By doing so, they are more likely to make decisions that promote — airness and justice — or all.419

In the context o

university governance, Rawls’ veil o — ignorance provides a valuable tool — or assessing whether divestment decisions are just. Universities should ask: What would we choose i — we didn’t know whether we were part o — the — inancially privileged group bene — iting

rom continued investments, or part o — the marginalized communities su —

ering — rom the consequences o — those investments?420 This thought experiment encourages universities to prioritize the most vulnerable stakeholders when making ethical decisions.421

Moreover, Rawls’ emphasis on distributive justice compels universities to consider how their — inancial decisions impact the least advantaged members o — society.422 By divesting

rom industries that contribute to environmental harm or social injustice, universities can act in ways that bene — it the common good and promote a more equitable distribution o —

resources. Rawlsian justice thus provides a

ramework — or ensuring that universities act with — airness and integrity, particularly when their — inancial actions have global consequences.

418 John Rawls, THEORY OF Justice 118 (1999 ed.); Rawls argues that under the veil o — ignorance, knowing nothing about ones own position within society, or the relative position o — his broader community, all would reach the same decisions about what principles and — rameworks are just—namely in seeking to protect the most vulnerable. See id. 118-123; Simon Caney, JUSTICE BEYOND BORDERS: A GLOBAL POLITICAL THEORY (2005). 419 See id. 420 See id. 421 See Rawls, supra note 325 (without knowing one’s speci — ic place in society, as Rawls advocates — or, actors are encouraged to li — t up the most underprivileged and thereby level the playing — ield, this being the only way to ensure reasonable security — or themselves). 422 Rawls, supra note 391, at 64 (discussing the distribution o — opportunity in the sense o — employment and positions o — power and prestige as being partially determined by the “natural lottery” distributing ability, and arguing that this is arbitrary and unjust). 102 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    1. The “Veil o ---  Ignorance” and University Decision-Making

In the context o

university governance, the veil o — ignorance can serve as a power — ul tool

or evaluating disentanglement decisions. Universities are complex institutions with multiple stakeholders—students, — aculty, alumni, investors, and community members— each o — whom may have di —

erent interests and levels o — in — luence. Rawls’ theory invites universities to ask: What kind o — policies would we choose i — we did not know which stakeholder group we belonged to?423

For example, when deciding whether to divest

rom — ossil — uel companies or boycott corporations tied to human rights abuses, universities might — ace con — licting pressures. Financial interests may suggest maintaining investments in lucrative industries, while ethical considerations might — avor divestment. Rawls’ veil o — ignorance requires universities to strip away these biases and consider what is — air to all. I — a university did not know whether it was more closely aligned with power — ul investors or marginalized communities a —

ected by climate change or human rights abuses, it might be more inclined to adopt policies that promote justice and — airness — or the most vulnerable stakeholders.424

This approach leads to decisions that prioritize the common good, even i

they come at the expense o — short-term — inancial gains. By applying the veil o — ignorance, universities can position themselves as moral leaders, making decisions that align with the principles o — equity and social justice rather than narrow, sel — -serving interests.

Applying Rawls’ veil o

ignorance to university investments requires decision-makers to consider what they would choose i — they were part o — the marginalized communities a —

ected by corporate practices. For example, universities maintaining investments in regions prone to climate change must ask whether those a —

ected would bene — it — rom those decisions or be — urther marginalized by environmental degradation. Such questions ensure that justice remains at the core o — decision-making.

    2. Distributive Justice and the Allocation o ---  Resources

Rawls’ theory also emphasizes the importance o

distributive justice, which concerns the

air allocation o — resources and opportunities within a society.425 Universities, as

423 Rawls, supra note 391. 424 Source and accompanying text, supra note 391 425 Rawls, supra note 391, at 64, 65-66 (discussing the e —

ect o — natural talents and — amily and social circumstances on economic outcome even where societies guarantee equal opportunity and proposing as a viable solution a — ramework where no individual in society increases in wealth unless that increase makes all members better o —

, with the best case scenario being that in which the utility or satis — action o — those least advantaged is maximized). 103 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

institutions with signi

icant — inancial, intellectual, and social capital, have a pro — ound impact on how resources are distributed both within their own communities and in the broader society.

In the context o

university disentanglement, distributive justice raises important questions about how the costs and bene — its o — actions such as divestment are allocated. For instance, i — a university decides to divest — rom a lucrative but ethically questionable industry, how will the resulting — inancial impact be distributed? Will it a —

ect the availability o — scholarships — or students — rom underrepresented backgrounds? Will it reduce — unding

or academic research? Or will the burdens o — divestment primarily — all on more a —

luent stakeholders, such as alumni donors or corporate partners?

Rawls’ theory suggests that universities should structure their policies in ways that bene

it the least advantaged members o — their communities.426 This might involve ensuring that any — inancial losses — rom divestment do not disproportionately harm students — rom low- income — amilies or under — unded academic programs. By prioritizing the needs o — the most vulnerable, universities can make decisions that re — lect a commitment to — airness and equity.

Moreover, distributive justice extends beyond the internal university community. Universities, as in — luential institutions in society, have a responsibility to consider how their — inancial and operational decisions a —

ect global inequality. For example, investing in companies that exploit labor in developing countries or contribute to environmental degradation disproportionately harms marginalized populations. From a Rawlsian perspective, universities have a moral obligation to ensure that their — inancial activities do not exacerbate existing social and economic inequalities.

    3. Fairness in Academic and Administrative Governance

In addition to

inancial decisions, Rawls’ theory o — justice has implications — or how universities govern themselves. Fairness in academic and administrative policies is crucial

or maintaining institutional legitimacy and promoting an inclusive educational environment.427 For example, decisions about — aculty hiring, student admissions, and resource allocation should be made with an eye toward equity and — airness.428 The veil o —

426 See id. 427 Rawls sees the concept o — just distribution through a lens o — equal outcome, at least in an ideal scenario. He notes that “per — ect procedural justice” has a predetermined — air outcome and a system in place ensuring that outcome, as in the equal division o — a cake among a group o — people. See John Rawls, A THEORY OF JUSTICE 83-90 (1971) (discussing the importance o —

air distribution o — o —

ices and resources in society with a — ocus on the necessity o — equal access to opportunity). 428 See id. 104 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

ignorance can serve as a guiding principle in these processes, ensuring that no group is un — airly advantaged or disadvantaged by institutional policies.

Universities must also consider

airness in their responses to external pressures, such as political campaigns or public controversies. When universities — ace demands to boycott or divest, they should apply the principles o — Rawlsian justice to evaluate the — airness o — their actions. This requires a care — ul balancing o — the interests o — all stakeholders, with particular attention to how decisions a —

ect marginalized groups or those with less political or — inancial in — luence.429

       4. Rawlsian Justice as a Guide  --- or Institutional Ethics

Rawls’ theory o

justice provides universities with a — ramework — or ethical decision- making that goes beyond mere compliance with legal standards. By applying the principles o — the veil o — ignorance and distributive justice, universities can ensure that their policies promote — airness, equity, and the common good. This approach encourages institutions to act as moral leaders, prioritizing justice in their — inancial, academic, and administrative decisions.

Ultimately, Rawlsian justice o

ers universities a way to reconcile competing interests and navigate complex moral dilemmas. In the context o — disentanglement, this — ramework enables universities to evaluate the — airness o — their actions, ensuring that they do not privilege the power — ul at the expense o — the vulnerable. By embracing Rawls’ vision o —

justice, universities can make decisions that re

lect their commitment to creating a more equitable and just society.

   F. The Tension Between Autonomy and Social Responsibility Universities are o --- ten caught in a philosophical and practical tension between institutional autonomy and social responsibility. Autonomy re --- lects a university’s right to sel --- -governance, ensuring that academic  --- reedom, inquiry, and decision-making are protected  --- rom external inter --- erence.430 On the other hand, social responsibility re --- lects the expectation that universities, as centers o ---  moral and intellectual leadership, should actively engage in promoting societal good, particularly in responding to calls  --- or ethical divestment or boycott. Balancing these competing imperatives is a core challenge  --- or modern university governance, and it raises  --- undamental questions about how universities should navigate their role in addressing moral and ethical dilemmas.

429 See note and accompanying text supra note 398. 430 See Joseph Raz, THE MORALITY OF FREEDOM (2003). 105 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    1. Autonomy as a Core Institutional Value

Institutional autonomy is one o

the cornerstones o — academic — reedom. Historically, universities have been granted a degree o — independence — rom external authorities—be they government, corporate interests, or even public opinion—to — oster an environment where scholarship and inquiry can thrive.431 The value o — autonomy is that it allows universities to explore controversial ideas, pursue independent research, and make governance decisions that are in the best interest o — their academic mission, without being unduly in — luenced by external pressures. 432

In the context o

disentanglement decisions, autonomy allows universities to retain control over their — inancial and ethical choices, resisting pressures to divest or boycott i —

they believe such actions compromise their academic

reedom or — inancial stability. For instance, a university might argue that maintaining investments in certain industries, even those considered ethically problematic, is necessary to sustain its long-term educational mission. The preservation o —

inancial resources ensures that the institution can continue to o —

er scholarships, — und research, and uphold its broader academic goals.

Moreover, autonomy protects universities

rom becoming political battlegrounds, where external groups might seek to impose their own agendas. By maintaining autonomy, universities can sa — eguard their integrity and resist the politicization o — their — inancial or governance decisions.

    2. Social Responsibility as Moral Imperative

At the same time, universities have a pro

ound social responsibility.433 As institutions that shape — uture generations o — leaders, they are expected to uphold moral standards and act in ways that promote justice, equality, and the common good.434 This responsibility

431 Charles W. Anderson, PRESCRIBING THE LIFE OF THE MIND 152 (1993) (“We do need to preserve, indeed to strengthen, the strange quasimedieval belie — that the university is a kind o — natural autonomous corporation which the state is obligated to nurture and protect but which must be permitted to de — ine and seek its own ends.”). 432 See id. (explaining the importance o —

reedom — rom coercion in order — or actors to maintain autonomy and

reely choose their course). 433 Henry Shue, BASIC RIGHTS: SUBSISTENCE, AFFLUENCE, AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY 59-60 (2020) (discussing the “positive duty” to design institutions that respect the rights o — individuals, clearly applicable to the institution o — the university and its positive duty to act in ways that respect the rights o — all people through — inancial, educational, and research endeavors); Some theorists argue that responsibility is itsel — a component o —

autonomy. See Cass R. Sunstein, Social Norms and Social Roles in Eric Posner, LAW AND ECONOMICS 167 (2000) (“A citizen can be understood as autonomous inso — ar as she is able to choose among a set o —

reasonably good options and to be re

lective and deliberative about her choice.”). 434 See Jean-Paul Sartre, EXISTENTIALISM AND HUMANISM 29 (translated by Philip Mairet, 1968) (hereina — ter Sartre) (contending that an agent’s actions have broad social implications, “When a man commits to anything, — ully

                                               106 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

extends beyond their internal academic community to the broader society, as universities are o — ten viewed as moral exemplars.435 The public expects universities to take a stand on critical social issues, — rom environmental sustainability to human rights, particularly when these issues are tied to university investments or partnerships.

Social responsibility compels universities to engage in ethical decision-making, ensuring that their — inancial actions are aligned with their stated values and that they do not contribute to global injustices. For example, i — a university continues to invest in companies that are complicit in human rights abuses or environmental harm, it risks undermining its moral legitimacy and losing the trust o — its students, — aculty, and the wider community.436

In this sense, social responsibility can be seen as an extension o

the university’s educational mission. Universities are not just centers — or academic learning but are also incubators — or ethical leadership. By divesting — rom unethical industries or boycotting companies that engage in unjust practices, universities demonstrate their commitment to moral leadership, setting an example — or other institutions to — ollow.

    3. Navigating the Tension: Autonomy in Service o ---  Social Responsibility

The challenge

or universities is how to reconcile these two imperatives—autonomy and social responsibility—without compromising either. One approach is to view autonomy not as an end in itsel — , but as a means to — ul — ill the university’s broader social mission.437 Autonomy should empower universities to make decisions based on their ethical

realizing that he is not only choosing what he will be but is thereby at the same time a legislator deciding

or the whole o — mankind–in such a moment a man cannot escape — rom the sense o — complete and pro — ound responsibility.”); This can also be understood through considering the relative ease with which universities can shape the social norms adhered to by the up and coming generation, a pivotal means o — a —

ecting the state o — society. Cass R. Sunstein, Social Norms and Social Roles in Eric Posner, LAW AND ECONOMICS 138-139 (2000). 435 See Charles W. Anderson, PRESCRIBING THE LOGIC OF THE MIND 150-156 (1993) (exploring ways to — actor public perception and opinion into university governance and decision-making, including the perspectives o —

the student body as well as the broader society). 436 This mirrors the disappointment among Stan — ord stakeholders — ollowing the university’s re — usal to commit to total divestment — rom — ossil — uels and their entrance into a public relations deal with a — irm tied to the — ossil

uel industry. Dharna Noor, Stan — ord Disappoints Critics o — Fossil Fuel Donations by Hiring PR Firm with Big Oil Ties, THE GUARDIAN (June 17, 2024), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/17/stan — ord- pr- — irm- — ossil- — uels. 437 This idea — inds support in Sartre’s existential argument — or the li — e o — man, wherein he posits that humans are “subjective” creatures inso — ar as it is our obligation to determine — or ourselves what our nature will be, Sartre contends that this implies individual — reedom, but even more importantly an inherent connection to the broader society and responsibility to our communities. See Sartre supra note 332. 107 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

principles,

ree — rom coercive — orces, while ensuring that these decisions promote justice and the common good.438

For example, a university might exercise its autonomy to decide whether or not to divest

rom a controversial industry. Rather than seeing this as a capitulation to external pressures, the university could — rame its decision as an ethical choice made on its own terms, consistent with its values.439 This would allow the institution to demonstrate both its independence and its commitment to social responsibility.

    4. The Limits o ---  Autonomy

However, autonomy has its limits, particularly when universities’ actions (or inactions) perpetuate harm. When universities claim autonomy as a de — ense against calls — or divestment or boycott, they risk appearing indi —

erent to pressing social issues. Autonomy should not be used as a shield — or inaction when the university’s — inancial activities contribute to global injustices or undermine its moral authority.

For instance, in cases where universities are pressured to divest

rom — ossil — uels, claiming that autonomy allows them to continue these investments might erode public trust. 440 Students, — aculty, and alumni may see this as a — ailure to live up to the university’s ethical responsibilities. In these situations, universities need to weigh the ethical costs o —

inaction against the bene

its o — maintaining autonomy.

Autonomy, there

ore, should be exercised responsibly, with an understanding that universities, as in — luential societal actors, have obligations beyond their academic missions.441 Universities must ensure that their actions do not con — lict with their moral and ethical obligations to society.

    5. A New Framework  --- or Ethical University Autonomy

To navigate the tension between autonomy and social responsibility, universities should adopt a — ramework that recognizes autonomy as a tool — or promoting ethical governance. This — ramework would allow universities to maintain their independence while also acting in ways that re — lect their social responsibilities.

438 See id. 439 Id. 440 See source and accompanying text supra note 334. 441 See Sartre, supra note 407, at 30 (contending that an agent’s actions have broad social implications, “When a man commits to anything, — ully realizing that he is not only choosing what he will be but is thereby at the same time a legislator deciding — or the whole o — mankind–in such a moment a man cannot escape — rom the sense o — complete and pro — ound responsibility.”) 108 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Such a

ramework could involve transparent decision-making processes, where universities openly discuss the ethical implications o — their investments or partnerships. 442 By engaging students, — aculty, and other stakeholders in these decisions, universities can ensure that their actions are both autonomous and morally sound.443 This approach would allow universities to retain control over their — inancial decisions while also — ul — illing their role as ethical leaders.

Furthermore, universities should establish guiding principles

or when and how to engage in divestment or boycott actions. These principles could be based on the university’s commitment to justice, sustainability, and human rights, ensuring that decisions are consistent with its values. By having clear, articulated standards, universities can exercise their autonomy in ways that enhance their moral authority rather than diminish it.

  G. Moral Legitimacy and Public Accountability As institutions o ---  higher learning, universities are o --- ten held to exceptionally high moral standards. Society expects universities to serve not only as centers o ---  education and research, but also as moral exemplars that re --- lect and promote the values o ---  justice, equality, and ethical leadership. This expectation gives rise to the concept o ---  moral legitimacy—the idea that universities must operate in ways that are ethically sound and publicly de --- ensible, thereby maintaining the trust and con --- idence o ---  the broader community.444

In the context o

university disentanglement decisions—whether related to divestment

rom industries such as — ossil — uels or withdrawal — rom partnerships with unethical corporations—moral legitimacy plays a critical role. Universities’ actions in these areas are scrutinized by their stakeholders, including students, — aculty, alumni, and the public.

442 See Charles W. Anderson, PRESCRIBING THE LOGIC OF THE MIND 150-156 (1993) (exploring ways to — actor public perception and opinion into university governance and decision-making, including the perspectives o —

the student body as well as the broader society); Stan

ord attempted to implement a transparent decision- making process via — ormation o — a committee to analyze their — ossil — uel investments and recommend the proper course o — action going — orward. Institutional News, Stan — ord Report, Stan — ord Committee Report Calls

or ‘Better Guardrails’ But Not a Blanket Ban on Fossil Fuel Industry Research Funding (Jun 27, 2024), https://news.stan — ord.edu/stories/2024/06/ — ossil- — uel- — unding-committee-report. 443 Id. 444 For a discussion o — the concept o — the conduct and choices o — individual actors as it relates to their moral standing see G.A. Cohen, I — You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich?, 4 J. ETHICS 1 (2000) (considering the obligation o — rich individuals who claim to be pro-equality and opposed to the wealth gap to contribute personally and directly to the resolution o — the problem through donating vast amounts o — wealth). In some sense, the university occupies an interesting role, as they have no de — ense — or inaction. While some would argue that individuals have no obligation to contribute vast sums o — their personal wealth, absent institutional — rameworks that ensure others will do likewise thereby alleviating the problem o — wealth disparity, universities may not be able to avail themselves o — this de — ense because they are institutions constructing — rameworks. See id. 109 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

Decisions that align with societal values o

justice and equity bolster the university’s moral legitimacy, while those that are perceived as ethically inconsistent or indi —

erent to injustice can seriously undermine it.445

    1. The Importance o ---  Public Accountability

Moral legitimacy is closely tied to public accountability. Universities are not isolated institutions; they are embedded within local, national, and global communities. As such, they must be accountable to the public — or their actions, particularly when those actions have broader social implications.446 Public accountability demands that universities act transparently, explaining the ethical reasoning behind their decisions and ensuring that these decisions re — lect their role as moral leaders. 447

In recent years, students,

aculty, and activists have increasingly called — or universities to be more socially responsible in their — inancial and operational decisions.448 Movements advocating — or — ossil — uel divestment, — air labor practices, and human rights have placed pressure on universities to reassess their investments and partnerships.449 The rise o —

social media and the 24-hour news cycle has intensi

ied this pressure, as universities’ actions are now subject to real-time public scrutiny. In this climate, universities can no longer make decisions behind closed doors without risking damage to their reputation and moral authority.

Universities, there

ore, must embrace public accountability by engaging with their communities in meaning — ul ways. This could involve holding public — orums, where students and — aculty can express their views on university investments, or establishing advisory committees to guide ethical decision-making.450 By — ostering open dialogue and involving stakeholders in the decision-making process, universities can build trust and demonstrate their commitment to acting with moral integrity.

445 Consider, — or instance, the discussion by G.A. Cohen, supra note 417, at 1-2 (noting the perceived inconsistency and apparent hypocrisy o — the wealthy egalitarian). 446 See Arthur L. Stinchcombe, THE LOGIC OF SOCIAL RESEARCH 211 (2005) (discussing the importance o —

knowledgeable group members in order to promote “bargains” within society, directly applicable to the need

or universities to maintain transparency with students and other community members in order to maintain the bargain o — mutual respect and support). 447 Id. 448 See discussion supra Part III. 449 Id. 450 See Charles W. Anderson, PRESCRIBING THE LOGIC OF THE MIND 150-156 (1993) (exploring ways to — actor public perception and opinion into university governance and decision-making, including the perspectives o —

the student body as well as the broader society 110 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

    2. Moral Leadership in a Global Context

Universities’ role as moral leaders extends beyond their immediate communities. As in — luential institutions with signi — icant — inancial and intellectual capital, universities have the power to shape global norms around justice, human rights, and sustainability.451 By divesting — rom industries that contribute to environmental degradation or human rights abuses, universities can send a power — ul message to the world that they stand on the side o — justice and moral integrity.452

For example, the global movement to divest

rom apartheid-era South A — rica, spearheaded by university students and — aculty, played a critical role in raising awareness about the moral — ailings o — the regime and contributed to the eventual dismantling o — apartheid. 453 Similarly, today’s movements calling — or divestment — rom — ossil — uels or boycotts o —

companies that exploit labor in developing countries re

lect universities’ capacity to in — luence global ethical standards.

By embracing this role, universities can leverage their moral authority to lead societal change, pushing — or re — orms that promote sustainability, equity, and justice. This moral leadership is not just about protecting the university’s reputation; it is about — ul — illing the institution’s ethical responsibility to contribute to a more just and equitable world.

    3. The Risks o ---  Failing Public Expectations

While moral legitimacy and public accountability are power

ul tools — or enhancing a university’s reputation, the — ailure to meet public expectations can have serious consequences. When universities are perceived as acting in ways that contradict their stated values—such as by investing in industries that harm the environment or perpetuate human rights violations—they risk losing the trust o — their communities.

This erosion o

trust can lead to student protests, — aculty resignations, and negative media attention, all o — which can damage the university’s reputation and — inancial standing.454 Moreover, universities that — ail to act in accordance with their ethical responsibilities may

ind it harder to attract talented students and — aculty, as well as — unding — rom ethically minded donors and organizations.

451 See Cass R. Sunstein, Social Norms and Social Roles in Eric A. Posner LAW AND ECONOMICS 142, 145 (2000) (discussing the positive e —

ect o — changing social norms and the impact o — agents going against the grain to challenge current norms and e —

ect new ones). 452 See Id. 453 See discussion supra Part III.D. 454 See discussion supra Part III (discussing myriad historical cases o — campus protests all induced by stakeholder discontent with the decisions o — universities to hypocritically align with companies, groups, and organizations perceived to go against the universities’ stated values). 111 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

In short, universities that

ail to live up to their moral obligations risk losing their moral legitimacy and the public’s con — idence. To avoid this, universities must continually assess their actions through the lens o — ethical responsibility, ensuring that their decisions are consistent with the values o — justice, equity, and public accountability.

   4. A Framework  --- or Building Moral Legitimacy

To maintain and strengthen their moral legitimacy, universities should adopt a

ramework

or decision-making that prioritizes ethical transparency and public accountability. This

ramework could include the — ollowing elements:

   1.     Ethical Guidelines: Establish clear ethical guidelines that govern university
          investments, partnerships, and operations. These guidelines should be
          based on the institution’s core values and aligned with broader societal
          standards o ---  justice and equity.
   2.     Stakeholder Engagement: Create  --- ormal mechanisms  --- or engaging
          students,  --- aculty, and other stakeholders in the decision-making process.
          This could include public  --- orums, advisory committees, and open
          discussions about the ethical implications o ---  university actions.
   3.     Transparency: Ensure that university governance is transparent, particularly
          in areas where moral and ethical decisions are involved. Universities should
          provide clear, accessible in --- ormation about their investments and
          partnerships, as well as the reasoning behind their ethical decisions.
   4.     Public Reporting: Commit to regular public reporting on the university’s
          ethical decision-making, including progress on divestment or boycott
          initiatives. This reporting should include measurable outcomes and
          demonstrate the university’s commitment to its ethical responsibilities.
   5.     Ethical Leadership: Finally, universities must embrace their role as moral
          leaders, using their in --- luence to advocate  --- or social justice, human rights,
          and environmental sustainability. By leading by example, universities can
          inspire other institutions to  --- ollow suit and contribute to a more just and
          equitable world.    H. Summary o ---  Moral Philosophy o ---  Disentanglement In examining university disentanglement decisions through the lenses o ---  utilitarianism, deontological ethics, virtue ethics, Rawlsian justice, and the tension between autonomy and social responsibility, it becomes clear that universities play a pro --- ound role as moral agents within society. Each o ---  these philosophical  --- rameworks provides

                                      112 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

unique insights into how universities should navigate the complex ethical terrain o

divestment, boycotts, and broader governance decisions.

Utilitarianism emphasizes the maximization o

societal wel — are, asking universities to consider the consequences o — their actions and strive — or the greatest good.455 Deontological ethics, on the other hand, insists that universities must adhere to moral principles regardless o — the outcomes, re — lecting their commitment to justice and integrity.456 Virtue ethics highlights the importance o — cultivating an institution’s moral character, ensuring that actions re — lect virtues like courage, integrity, and wisdom. 457 Rawlsian justice o —

ers a — ramework — or ensuring that university decisions are grounded in

airness and equity, particularly when viewed through the veil o — ignorance.458 Finally, the tension between autonomy and social responsibility challenges universities to balance their independence with their moral obligations to society, ensuring that their actions promote the common good.459

By integrating these philosophical approaches, universities can create a comprehensive ethical — ramework that in — orms their governance and decision-making processes. Disentanglement decisions, — ar — rom being merely — inancial or operational, are opportunities — or universities to demonstrate their moral leadership and public accountability. Acting in accordance with these principles strengthens the university’s moral legitimacy and ensures that it — ul — ills its role as a beacon o — ethical integrity in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.

VI. Conclusion The evolving landscape o — higher education demands that universities con — ront moral and ethical challenges with a level o — sophistication and — oresight that extends — ar beyond the crisis o — the moment. As illuminated in Part I, the pressures on universities to respond to social and political con — licts are not new; they echo through the past century, mani — esting as a recurring struggle to reconcile institutional autonomy with the demands o — justice and public accountability. By tracing these dilemmas across time, this paper reveals the persistent and pro — ound challenge o — university disentanglement, establishing the need — or a theory o — the university.

Part II laid the

oundation — or a central element o — such a theory by presenting ethical principles and decision-making models that serve as more than theoretical constructs: the

455 See discussion supra Part V.B. 456 See discussion supra Part V.C. 457 See discussion supra Part V.D. 458 See discussion supra Part V.E. 459 See discussion supra Part V.F. 113 o — 115 Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

matrix o

university disentanglement is a tool — or evaluating the moral and ethical dimensions o — university governance. The matrix o —

er a structured way to think about how institutions can navigate demands — or action in a manner that is both principled and practical. Yet, as Part III demonstrated, merely adopting a moral — rame is not enough. Through the examination o — historical examples, this paper shows that the choice o —

ethical approach is decisive—certain

rameworks consistently lead to more — avorable outcomes, while others can exacerbate harm and controversy. It is not simply the presence o — ethical reasoning that matters, but its quality, depth, and alignment with the institution’s values.

Part IV provided empirical evidence to support this argument, with case studies that laid bare the real-world consequences o — inconsistent or opportunistic ethical applications. Institutions like Harvard and Columbia, which wavered in their moral commitments, encountered reputational, — inancial, and legal turmoil. By contrast, the University o —

Chicago’s unwavering adherence to the Chicago Principles allowed it to navigate controversy with a resilience that others lacked, reaping not only stability but also substantial — inancial support. These case studies reveal the immense stakes involved in ethical decision-making, underscoring that the selection and consistent application o — the right ethical — ramework can determine an institution’s ability to withstand and even thrive amidst moral crises.

The normative

rameworks introduced in Part V o —

er more than a synthesis o — prior insights

rom philosophy; this Part o —

ers a pathway to a trans — ormative approach to university governance. It provides a structured model — or assessing the ethical and practical dimensions o — various strategies, guiding institutions toward decisions that are not only de — ensible but aspirational. Integrating the matrix o —

ers a blueprint — or navigating — uture challenges with a level o — integrity and purpose that transcends reactive governance, positioning universities as true moral leaders in society. It does so by urging institutions to ground their decision-making in well-chosen, consistently applied ethical principles— principles that re — lect the enduring mission o — higher education.

Thus, this Article does not merely critique the current state o

university governance as an under-theorized application o — corporate governance. It sets — orth a vision — or a — ully

ledged theory o — university governance that re — lects the unique role these institutions play in society. The argument advanced here is not bound by the particulars o — any single crisis; rather, it speaks to the timeless responsibility o — universities to lead with moral clarity and to — ul — ill their complex roles as both academic institutions (with triple missions in teaching, research, and social progress), moral actors, and — inancial stewards. By adopting and consistently applying the right ethical and moral — rameworks, universities can achieve a

                                      114 o ---  115

Seth C. Oranburg University Disentanglement

orm o — governance that not only addresses immediate challenges but also positively shapes the social landscape — or generations to come.

The insights o

ered in this paper aim to rede — ine the very nature o — principled governance in higher education by inviting a new conversation about university governance per se. The next challenge is — or university leadership and academics to think beyond mere compliance with ethical standards or application on existing governance models, so university may embody the values they pro — ess. In doing so, this work provides not just a model — or navigating crises, but a — oundation — or a theory o — the university that can elevate the mission o — higher education to new heights.460

                                                  ***

460 In dra — ting this Article, I utilized AI tools, including ChatGPT, Perplexity.AI, LexisAI, and NotebookLM to critique my argument and thesis. I also employed AI tools to assist with locating and eliminating redundancies and improving sentences — or clarity and grammatical accuracy. I consulted with Dr. Julie Simpson, Director o — Research Integrity Services at the University o — New Hampshire, on the ethical considerations o — using AI in legal scholarship. Dr. Simpson provided guidance and shared resources, including relevant publications and the UNH Responsible Conduct o — Research & Scholarly Activity Library Guide. I thank Dr. Simpson — or her insights, which helped in — orm my responsible use o — AI tools. All substantive legal analysis, arguments, and — inal revisions were conducted by me—Seth C. Oranburg—to ensure accuracy and scholarly rigor. Any errors or omissions remain my own. 115 o — 115