Activism

At Harvard, a Battle Over What Should Be Said About the Hamas Attacks

Harvard leadership, including its first Black president, Claudine Gay, came under fire for failing to voice an opinion, or take a formal stance against the war in the Middle East provoked by an attack by Hamas, an Islamic resistance movement that started in 1987.

Published

2 years ago

October 14, 2023

Oakland Post

Claudine Gay is Harvard University’s first Black president. File photo.

Adapted from the New York Times

Everybody has an opinion.

For some individuals and institutions, like colleges and universities, the question becomes whether or not those opinions should be voiced.

On Monday, Lawrence H. Summers, the former Treasury secretary, and former Harvard president was outraged at the institution’s failure to denounce a statement from a coalition of Palestinian Solidarity Groups at Harvard that blamed Israel for the hostilities that began on Oct. 7.

“In nearly 50 years of @Harvard affiliation, I have never been as disillusioned and alienated as I am today,” he wrote on X, formerly Twitter. Harvard’s silence, coupled with the student coalition letter, he said, “has allowed Harvard to appear at best neutral towards acts of terror against the Jewish state of Israel.”

Gay, then issued two statements Monday night, ultimately condemning “the terrorist atrocities perpetrated by Hamas” as “abhorrent.”

On Tuesday, Gay said that “while our students have the right to speak for themselves, no student group — not even 30 student groups — speaks for Harvard University or its leadership.”

The Harvard student letter said, “For the last two decades, millions of Palestinians in Gaza have been forced to live in an open-air prison,” and concluded that as the war unfolded, “the apartheid regime is the only one to blame.”

It was signed by groups including Amnesty International at Harvard, the Harvard Kennedy School Palestine Caucus and the Harvard Divinity School Muslim Association.

Immediately after the Hamas attacks in Israel — in which assailants killed women and children — Harvard was quiet even as criticism mounted over an open letter from a student coalition.

By comparison, within a few days of the George Floyd killing in 2020 and Russia’s war against Ukraine in 2022, Harvard and other universities had issued statements, claiming solidarity with the victims.

But Dr. Summers’s pointed criticism raised questions about the obligation of universities to weigh in on difficult political matters.

Since the 1960s, it has been common for the students at institutions of higher learning to take stances on political and social issues – integrating lunch counters, protesting the Viet Nam War, U.S. corporations’ investments in apartheid South Africa.

But students over the years have frequently and successfully pressed their administrations to take positions on matters like police brutality, global warming and war.

Dr. Summers said in an interview that he could understand the case for university neutrality in political disputes, but that Harvard had forfeited that prerogative by speaking out on other issues, like Russia’s war against Ukraine and the killing of George Floyd by police in 2020.

But the controversy at Harvard is “a moment to think about the virtues of neutrality,” said Dr. Tom Ginsburg, Tom Ginsburg, faculty director of the newly created Forum for Free Inquiry and Expression at the University of Chicago.

Avoiding statements allows the university to channel its energy into “more important things,” Ginsburg said. “But that’s not the trend. Schools seem to be speaking out. And that’s why they find themselves in political trouble.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

California Latino Legislative Caucus Celebrates 50th Anniversary

Don't Miss

COMMENTARY: War Against Palestine — Show Caution

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

As California Hits Aging Milestone, State Releases Its Fifth Master Plan for Aging

“California’s Master Plan for Aging started a powerful movement that is shaping the future of aging in our state for generations to come,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement, calling the initiative a “future-forward” model delivering real results for older adults, people with disabilities, and their families.

Published

17 hours ago

February 9, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

On Jan. 27, California released its Fifth Master Plan for Aging Annual Report,titled “Focusing on What Matters Most,” outlining the state’s progress and priorities as its population rapidly grows older.

The report, issued by the California Health and Human Services Agency (CalHHS), provides updates on the Master Plan for Aging’s “Five Bold Goals”: housing, health, inclusion and equity, caregiving, and affordability.

The report comes as Californians aged 60 and older now outnumber those under 18 for the first time, a demographic shift expected to accelerate over the next decade.

Launched in 2021, the Master Plan for Aging takes a “whole-of- government” and “whole-of-society” approach, coordinating state agencies, local governments, community organizations, and private partners. The annual report highlights significant milestones, including more than 100 California communities joining AARP’s Age-Friendly Network and $4 million in state funding awarded to local organizations to develop aging and disability action plans in 30 communities statewide.

The report also underscores California’s leadership at the national level, noting that dozens of states have followed its example and that federal legislation inspired by the plan was reintroduced in the U.S. Senate in December 2025.

CalHHS Secretary Kim Johnson emphasized the plan’s focus on equity and resilience amid ongoing challenges.

“The Master Plan for Aging continues to provide a vision, a focus, and a platform for collaboration,” Johnson said. “Equity is at the center of all that we do.”

Looking ahead, the report notes that by 2030, one in four Californians will be age 60 or older, positioning the Master Plan for Aging as a central framework for meeting the state’s long-term social, economic, and health needs.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

After Don Lemon’s Arrest, Black Officials Raise Concerns About Independent Black Media

Elected leaders joining the call included U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37), Los Angeles County Supervisor Holly Mitchell (2nd District), Assemblymembers Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood), Mike Gipson (D-Carson), and Sade Elhawary (D-Los Angeles), and State Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-Los Angeles). While the meeting was prompted by Lemon’s arrest, the discussion quickly moved beyond him, turning to growing concerns about the vulnerability of Black journalists covering protests and dissent.

Published

17 hours ago

February 9, 2026

Oakland Post

Don Lemon. Shutterstock.

By Joe W. Bowers Jr., California Black Media

On Jan. 30, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass attended independent journalist Don Lemon’s federal court appearance at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Courthouse following his arrest in Los Angeles by federal authorities for conduct tied to his reporting on a protest nearly 2,000 miles away in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Shortly afterward, Bass convened a Zoom roundtable of Black elected leaders, city officials, and journalists to discuss what the case signaled — not just for Lemon, but for journalism more broadly.

While Lemon was being arrested, Georgia Fort, an award-winning Minneapolis journalist, was also arrested and charged in connection with her coverage of the protest inside the Cities Church in St. Paul reportedly targeted because a pastor worked as field director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Both Fort and Lemon have said they were reporting.

However, prosecutors allege conspiracy and violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act — a federal law that prohibits force, threats, or obstruction at reproductive health facilities and places of worship.

In a public statement issued after the arrest, Bass said the case “is about the First Amendment and the right of journalists to do their jobs without fear of intimidation or retaliation,” adding that journalists “must be able to cover events of public concern without being treated as criminals.”

That framing set the tone for the Zoom discussion. Participants raised concerns that Lemon’s speech and presence were being used to transform journalistic activity into evidence of criminal intent. Several warned that such an approach places journalists working outside major institutions at heightened risk.

Kamlager-Dove said the arrests cut to the heart of democratic accountability.

“Journalists must be able to report on protests, government actions, and civil rights issues without fear of arrest or retaliation,” she said. “When reporters are targeted for doing their jobs, it threatens the public’s right to know and undermines our democracy.”

As the discussion continued, the roundtable’s participants also made clear why Fort’s arrest mattered. Unlike Lemon, she is not a national television figure, a distinction participants said shows how independent journalists without major institutional backing are often the most vulnerable.

McKinnor said that reality cannot be ignored. “Black journalists have long played a critical role in documenting what others overlook or avoid,” she said. “When reporters are arrested for covering protests, it sends a message that truth-telling itself is being criminalized.”

Participants noted that the Minnesota protest space was multiracial, yet Black journalists were among those arrested — a pattern several described as familiar when Black reporters cover protests, immigration enforcement, policing, or civil rights issues.

Smallwood-Cuevas called the arrests “deeply troubling” and warned that “when journalists are arrested for documenting protests, it sends a chilling message not just to the press, but to the public.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

“Victory” for Voting Rights: Weber and Bonta Hail Judge’s Decision on Huntington Beach I.D. Law

“Today’s victory makes one thing crystal clear: No city in our state, charter and non-charter alike, is above the law,” Bonta said. “All along, Secretary of State Weber and I have maintained that Huntington Beach’s voter ID policy is illegal, and now, the state’s highest court has weighed in and agreed with us. Measure A won’t be taking effect — ever.”

Published

18 hours ago

February 9, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber hailed a major legal victory for voting rights after the California Supreme Court declined to review a challenge brought by the City of Huntington Beach against the state, effectively ending the city’s attempt to impose voter identification requirements in municipal elections.

The high court’s action leaves intact a Fourth District Court of Appeal ruling that struck down Huntington Beach’s voter ID law, known as Measure A, finding it unlawful and preempted by state law. By rejecting the city’s petition for review, the Supreme Court has fully resolved the case in favor of the state, concluding litigation initiated by Bonta and Weber on April 15, 2024.

Measure A amended the Huntington Beach city charter to purportedly authorize voter identification requirements at polling places for municipal elections beginning in 2026. State officials argued the measure conflicted with California election law and was adopted without evidence of voter fraud in the city. Courts at every level agreed, rejecting the city’s claims that such requirements were necessary to protect election integrity.

Bonta also criticized city leaders for promoting unfounded concerns about election security. “Huntington Beach’s leaders have been parroting the Trump Administration’s talking points by questioning the integrity of our elections,” he said. “In court, the City’s allegations were resoundingly rejected. I remain fully committed to protecting the right to vote from baseless attacks.”

Weber emphasized the broader implications of the ruling for voters statewide.

“Today the California Supreme Court declined to review the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision prohibiting the City of Huntington Beach from implementing illegal voter identification requirements,”

Weber said. “As California Secretary of State, I have a responsibility to ensure that every eligible Californian can exercise their constitutional right to vote, and I take that duty seriously.”

Weber added that state law clearly supersedes local efforts to impose additional voting barriers.

“Attorney General Bonta and I have held steadfast that state law preempts the City’s attempts to impose illegal voting requirements on eligible voters and that Huntington Beach’s Measure A is unlawful,” she said. “This is another victory for California, for voters, and for democracy.”