Harvard University, which has been in conflict with the Trump administration, is now facing accusations that it may have violated the Civil Rights Act during the promotion of its black alumni association. This controversy has emerged as the university is on the brink of a $500 million settlement with the Trump administration.
According to Newsmax on the 18th (local time), Harvard's black alumni association held a social event on the 9th that included the "Black Ivy Happy Hour Mixer," a networking party for Ivy League alumni of African descent, as well as an official cocktail reception featuring prominent figures. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Harvard Law School graduate, was also in attendance.
The issue is that the promotion of this event was conducted through Harvard's official domain. The website included the Harvard logo and related links, presenting the alumni association as if it were an official Harvard program. Legal experts have pointed out that this suggests Harvard may have violated its obligation to prohibit discrimination under the Civil Rights Act.
William Jacobson, a professor at Cornell Law School, stated, "The use of the school's domain and the promotion alone could be considered a Harvard program under Justice Department guidelines," adding, "They clearly crossed a line and there is a high risk of violating the Civil Rights Act." Anastasia Borden, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, also emphasized, "As long as they receive taxpayer support, Harvard cannot segregate people based on race," insisting, "They cannot just invoke the Harvard name when convenient and evade responsibility."
The legal controversy has also been evident in other scenes. Cheryl Cashin, a professor at Georgetown Law School, posted a photo with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson on social media after attending the event, describing it as "a social gathering where fundraising is also possible," but deleted that part after a comment from a senior Justice Department official. In response, William Trackman, a legal advisor at the Mountain States Legal Foundation, argued, "They seemed to be covering up evidence in awareness of the Trump administration's interest."
Legal experts explained that even if physical attendance by individuals of other races was not prohibited, if a signal was sent targeting only a specific group, it could still be considered a violation of the Civil Rights Act. Professor Jacobson noted, "The very way of dissuading participation could be deemed illegal," while advisor Trackman remarked, "Harvard is already under close scrutiny from the government for issues related to anti-Semitism and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs."
This controversy erupted shortly after reports indicated that Harvard was nearing an agreement with the administration. According to The New York Times (NYT), Harvard is discussing a plan to pay $500 million (approximately 7 trillion won) as a condition for restoring federal funding. The administration has warned that it would cut federal support if the university does not operate DEI programs properly or effectively control anti-Semitism.
Additionally, the law journal "Harvard Law Review" and the law school's race-based hiring and paper selection practices are already under investigation by the Justice Department, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is also examining whether hiring practices are based on race or gender.
There is significant backlash within Harvard. Over 14,000 students, faculty, and alumni signed a letter urging the university to reject agreements that undermine its autonomy. Despite this situation, the Harvard black alumni association has announced a follow-up event on the 20th, indicating that the controversy is likely to continue for the time being.