We're Jews. Kristi Noem's war on Harvard doesn't protect us.
I take issue with Noem's op-ed, which berated Harvard for alleged antisemitism and threatened to revoke the Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification that allows the university to admit and enroll foreign students.
I am a Harvard degree holder, Class of 1964, as well as a Jew and a Zionist who supports a two-state solution. My automobile bears a sticker stating 'I support Jewish college students.' By this, I mean I support Jewish students who either support or oppose Israel's actions and tactics toward Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and Israel proper.
We do not need the federal government telling Harvard how to deal with students — whether U.S. or foreign — who peacefully express their views on public issues, do not threaten others with physical harm, and observe reasonable rules that ensure noninterference with the university's teaching and other educational procedures. These are the 'American values' that matter, not some of those Noem espoused in her op-ed. Some students might be angry or outraged by the views peacefully expressed by their fellow students. That frustration is a part of life, and it is not something from which the government can protect them — though of course colleges and the government have an obligation to keep all people safe from physical harm.
I would add two thoughts. Foreign students add immeasurably to the quality of the educational experience of all students, whether they remain in the U.S. or return to another country. And I believe that most of the unfortunate increase in hateful speech directed at Jews, including Jewish students, is not a product of antisemitism but a reaction to Israeli government policies and practices that have caused so much pain and suffering to Palestinians.
Elihu I. Leifer, Chevy Chase
Secretary Kristi L. Noem claimed in her recent op-ed both that Harvard is unsafe for students and fostered 'antisemitic extremism,' and that the Department of Homeland Security 'reached out in good faith' before attempting to ban foreign students from campus.
As a Jewish student at Harvard Kennedy School, where more than half the students come to Cambridge from other countries, I want to share a different perspective. Yes, antisemitism is real. Yes, I know what it's like to feel afraid as a Jew.
But today, what scares me most is not knowing what illegal attempt Noem might make next in the name of antisemitism to suppress constitutional freedoms and target my classmates who have visas to study in the U.S. In April, more than 550 rabbis and cantors condemned the Trump administration for twisting Jewish safety to these ends. Noem should know better than to seemingly maintain that the administration represents all Jews' interests months later. And she certainly cannot speak for all Jews at Harvard.
This spring, when demand letters from the Trump administration began arriving both at Harvard and at federal agencies that have contracts with the university, my classmates and I read each one with growing concern. These did not seem like 'good faith' efforts at negotiation — a topic I study closely as a public policy student — but threats to seize control of university hiring, admissions, governance, discipline and teaching.
The law is clear: Noem and President Donald Trump unconstitutionally retaliated against Harvard, attacking freedom of thought, expression and speech, and threatening the university with immediate, irreparable harm. This is the opinion of U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs, who issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration's attempt to keep visa holders from coming to Harvard.
At Harvard Kennedy School, my closest friends come from Colombia, Germany and Singapore. They have enriched my learning and my life in countless ways. Our program would be shattered without them, and Harvard without its international students would become the epicenter of the Trump-fueled brain drain. Perhaps Noem needs a lesson in the economic benefits that foreign students bring to the entire nation, not just Harvard, and a refresher course on the First and Fifth amendments. And Harvard leadership should continue to stand against the unlawful actions of the Trump administration. Harvard students stand with them — and we fully expect to prevail.
Daniela Schulman, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Of all the claptrap that emanates from the Trump administration, Kristi L. Noem's op-ed lecturing Harvard about antisemitism has its own place of dishonor. Speaking as an American Jew, I would like to tell her what makes me feel insecure:
What makes American Jews like me feel most threatened is using us as an excuse to impose draconian strictures on society and then, when there is blowback (and eventually there will be, if history is any guide), using Jews as a scapegoat. The political theater that President Donald Trump engages in about antisemitism is naked political opportunism.
Joyce Saadi, Gaithersburg
Student and Exchange Visitor Program compliance is a legitimate regulatory concern, but the public, punitive framing the Trump administration is using to explain its actions toward Harvard University — especially when conveyed in an op-ed rather than a formal legal proceeding — suggests the goal is more than enforcement. The aim also appears to be intimidation and humiliation.
The action comes in the context of culture-war grievances: Conservatives have criticized Harvard for its response to pro-Palestinian protests and for its perceived 'wokeness.'
Threatening the university's ability to enroll international students — essential to its mission and funding — looks a lot like retaliation, not neutral governance.
Robert Stewart, Chantilly
What exactly is Harvard's offense, according to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem's strange and furious diatribe? Rampant antisemitism, she alleges. And what exactly does the secretary intend to do about it? She appears intent on strangling Harvard until it complies with … something.
Ten percent of Harvard's undergraduates were Jewish as of 2023. Why would they enroll at Harvard if it was antisemitic? Its president, Alan Garber, is Jewish, for heaven's sake, and so are many of its faculty members.
The administration seems to see Harvard and its peer institutions as labs breeding a cultural virus that they believe infected the country with liberal and progressive anti-Trumpism. Noem appears to have appointed herself the germ-hunter who's going to eradicate the source of that epidemic. The secretary writes that Harvard has to decide whether to get with the program or be 'an adversary to American values,' by which she means MAGA values. But it's Harvard's values that are quintessentially American: the search for truth and knowledge and understanding.
The idea that Harvard should fall under the purview of DHS because it's a threat to our national security is laughable. This is not the department's business.
Bruce Carnes, Fairfax
It might be true that there are antisemitic students enrolled at Harvard University. I would be willing to bet, though I do not have proof, that this is true of virtually every university in the United States. The same goes for racism, anti-Muslim sentiment and other biases that might be present in our diverse nation.
But I'm curious: Did Harvard as an institution support the 'Unite the Right' rally in Charlottesville in 2017? Did the university encourage protesters who opposed Israel's operations in Gaza to adopt ugly slogans or anti-Jewish language? I did not read any substantiation of Noem's statement that Harvard 'encouraged and fostered antisemitic extremism.'
Instead, did the university state that there is a right to peacefully express one's opinions, be they in support of gay pride, in opposition to Israel's actions, or for or against abortion?
I want to see proof that universities are encouraging a position before the university is punished for them.
Howard Pedolsky, Rockville
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why the market is shrugging off Trump's firing of the BLS chief
Trump fired the head of the BLS on Friday, but so far, markets have looked past the shock decision. Sources say there are a variety of other sources investors can use to assess the employment picture. Strong earnings and higher rate-cut odds are powering stocks higher on Monday. August kicked off with a shocker, with Donald Trump firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after a less-than-rosy July employment report. The move sparked prognostications about untrustworthy government data going forward and comparisons to China, which some believe is uninvestable due to issues with data quality. Then why is the market unfazed as trading kicks off on Monday? Stocks rallied to start the week, with the Dow up almost 500 points at midday and the Nasdaq Composite jumping as much as 2%. For now, markets are focused on other things, like the higher odds of a September rate cut after the employment picture suddenly soured. "Obviously, the firing was unconventional. That's pretty much everything with this administration compared to previous administrations, but at this point, there is so much private data that the market can look at other sources," Paul Hickey, cofounder of Bespoke Investment Group, told Business Insider. Apart from the BLS statistics that investors already parse, there's a patchwork of private and public data, including ADP data, hiring and firing data from a range of consulting firms, and labor market sentiment indicators from sources like the Conference Board. "There are private sources of data, and if they are moving in the opposite direction from the government data, then it becomes an indicator that something is off with the statistics,"Aleksandar Tomic, Associate Dean, Strategy, Innovation, & Technology at Boston College, told Business Insider. Trump said Erika McEntarfer's firing was justified and that the July data had been manipulated to make the administration look bad. He did not offer evidence for this claim, though White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said the revisions in the data are "hard evidence." The July revisions were substantial, showing that the US added nearly 260,000 fewer jobs in May and June than had been initially reported. Trump and Republicans have also criticized earlier revisions, including last year's that showed over 800,000 fewer jobs added in the 12 months leading up to March 2024. The irony of Trump's anger over the July jobs numbers is that the weak report has pushed up the odds of the September rate cut to nearly 90%, getting the president closer to seeing the Fed loosen monetary policy as he's been demanding all year. But for investors, things like the robust GDP report for the second quarter and solid corporate earnings, particularly among mega-cap tech giants, are boosting the outlook for the market even as Trump's move stirs some uncertainty. For Sergio Altomare, a former senior enterprise architect at the Fed, the next big question is who will replace McEntarfer at the helm of the BLS. "I think the ultimate impact is going to take time to sort itself out, but I think really the immediate thing is, who gets appointed? What is their background? What does the data show? Is it dramatically different from what we're seeing?" Altomare said that it will be difficult to properly assess the impact of Trump's decision on financial markets until these questions have clear answers. Luckily for markets, some answers could come soon. Trump has said that in the coming days, he'll nominate a new BLS chief, as well as a replacement for Fed Gov. Adriana Kugler, who resigned on Friday. Both positions require confirmation by the Senate. It is also worth noting that some agree with the president's decision. For his part, investing legend Ray Dalio said on Monday that he, too, would probably fire the BLS chief. In a post on X, he described the agency's process for making key economic estimates as "obsolete and error-prone," with no plan to fix it. "The revisions brought the numbers toward private estimates that were in fact much better," Dalio said. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alaska Sen. Murkowski toys with bid for governor, defends vote supporting Trump's tax breaks package
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Republican U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, speaking with Alaska reporters Monday, toyed with the idea of running for governor and defended her recent high-profile decision to vote in support of President Donald Trump's tax breaks and spending cuts bill. Murkowski, speaking from Anchorage, said 'sure' when asked if she has considered or is considering a run for governor. She later said her response was 'a little bit flippant' because she gets asked that question so often. 'Would I love to come home? I have to tell you, of course I would love to come home,' she said. 'I am not making any decisions about anything, because my responsibility to Alaskans is my job in the Senate right now.' Several Republicans already have announced plans to run in next year's governor's race, including Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom. Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy is not eligible to seek a third consecutive term. Alaska has an open primary system and ranked choice voting in general elections. Murkowski is not up for reelection until 2028. A centrist, Murkowski has become a closely watched figure in a sharply divided Congress. She has at times been at odds with her party in her criticism of Trump and blasted by some GOP voters as a 'Republican in name only.' But her decision to support Trump's signature bill last month also frustrated others in a state where independents comprise the largest number of registered voters. She previously described her decision-making process around the bill as 'agonizing.' On Monday, she said it was clear to her the bill was not only a priority of Trump's but also that it was going to pass, so it became important to her to help make it as advantageous to the state as she could. 'So I did everything within my power — as one lawmaker from Alaska — to try to make sure that the most vulnerable in our state would not be negatively impacted,' she said. 'And I had a hard choice to make, and I think I made the right choice for Alaskans.'


Fox News
5 minutes ago
- Fox News
Gov. Newsom vows to fight fire with fire if Texas lawmakers pass legislation regarding redistricting
Gov. Gavin Newsom vowed to fight fire with fire if Texas lawmakers pass legislation regarding redistricting.