Harvard tax exempt status revoked?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
🫨 that was waay after I graduated from college.

I'm in a biracial marriage with kids. I guess they also did not allow multiracial children up until 2000? Wow. That's pointedly obvious discrimination.

Back to Harvard: but, what public policy is Harvard violating exactly? DEI is just "equal opportunity" badged in a different. How is that against public policy? Is Trump saying that they don't want EO anymore? Is allowing pro Palestinian protests against public policy? That would be against 1A, no?

Did you even read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism on campus? That report is littered with smoking guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you even read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism on campus? That report is littered with smoking guns.

Again, please identify the official Harvard policy that comports with the ruling in Bob Jones. Still waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That is incorrect. Read the precedent below. Hopefully the lawyers that Harvard is producing know their case law, unlike DCUM.

Bob Jones University (BJU) had its tax-exempt status revoked by the IRS in the 1970s due to its racially discriminatory admissions policies. This action was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bob Jones University v. United States (1983), which established that tax-exempt status can be denied to organizations that violate public policy, including racial discrimination. However, the university later regained its tax-exempt status after dropping the ban on interracial dating in 2000.

Please identify the Harvard policy that, under Bob Jones, justifies revoking Harvard's tax-exempt status.

Please read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism. It has enough to incriminate itself

[Anonymous]

He is just messing with them. Harvard and Columbia have “Bud Lighted” their brands. No point in kicking them while they are down.

[Anonymous]

Couldn’t happen to a better place

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Please read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism. It has enough to incriminate itself

I'm assuming you're not a lawyer. (God, I hope not.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Couldn’t happen to a better place

aw sorry your kid got rejected

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Please read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism. It has enough to incriminate itself

I'm assuming you're not a lawyer. (God, I hope not.)

I'm assuming the PP has a GED at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you even read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism on campus? That report is littered with smoking guns.

Again, please identify the official Harvard policy that comports with the ruling in Bob Jones. Still waiting.

The key in Bob Jones is "tax-exempt status can be denied to organizations that violate public policy, including racial discrimination". For those bleating that the IRS cannot, Bob Jones clearly is precedent that they can!

In the United States, public policy prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal funding, including universities, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although Title VI does not explicitly mention religion, Jewish students are protected when discrimination is based on their ethnic or ancestral background.

If a university practices anti-Semitism-by encouraging, tolerating, or failing to address anti-Semitic harassment or discrimination-it can be found in violation of Title VI. The Harvard report shows that anti-Semitism was tolerated, encouraged and the administration failed to address it.

[Anonymous]

The very existence of that report (prepared by Harvard), and the steps that Harvard has taken in the last year, utterly belie your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
🫨 that was way after I graduated from college.

I'm in a biracial marriage with kids. I guess they also did not allow multiracial children up until 2000? Wow. That's pointedly obvious discrimination.

Back to Harvard: but, what public policy is Harvard violating exactly? DEI is just "equal opportunity" badged in a different. How is that against public policy? Is Trump saying that they don't want EO anymore? Is allowing pro Palestinian protests against public policy? That would be against 1A, no?

Did you even read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism on campus? That report is littered with smoking guns.

Given that it is 311 pages long I am sure that you didn't. But, I have read significant parts of it and there are no smoking guns to be found. Significant problems to be sure but no 'smoking guns'. If you want 'smoking guns' my little troll I would redirect my focus to Charlottesville where actual, real anti-semitism was on full display.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
🫨 that was waay after I graduated from college.

I'm in a biracial marriage with kids. I guess they also did not allow multiracial children up until 2000? Wow. That's pointedly obvious discrimination.

Back to Harvard: but, what public policy is Harvard violating exactly? DEI is just "equal opportunity" badged in a different. How is that against public policy? Is Trump saying that they don't want EO anymore? Is allowing pro Palestinian protests against public policy? That would be against 1A, no?

Did you even read Harvard's own report on anti-Semitism on campus? That report is littered with smoking guns.

Here's what it said in part...

“Muslim women who wear hijab and pro-Palestinian students wearing keffiyehs spoke about facing verbal harassment, being called ‘terrorists,’ and even being spat upon,” the task force said.

“The issue of doxxing was particularly highlighted as a significant concern that affects not only physical safety and mental well-being, but also future career prospects,” it added, referring to the practice of disclosing a person’s personal or identifying information online.

Nearly half of Muslim students and staff surveyed reported feeling physically unsafe on campus, while 92 percent said they believed they would face professional or academic penalties for expressing political views.

“As Muslim students we have been living in constant fear,” the taskforce quoted an unnamed student as saying.

“There have been trucks driving around campus for months, displaying the faces of Muslim students… my peers who have lost their jobs simply for being in the leadership of Muslim faith organisations have been left out to dry once they had their offers revoked… If there were antisemitic trucks driving around campus and planes flying over with antisemitic slogans, I cannot help but believe Harvard would have done more to stop it.”

The task force on combating anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli bias said in its report that bias had been “fomented, practiced, and tolerated” at Harvard and within academia more widely.

In an online survey, 26 percent of Jewish students reported feeling physically unsafe, while 39 percent said they did not feel at home at the university, the task force said.

Nearly 60 percent of Jewish students reported experiencing “discrimination, stereotyping, or negative bias” due to their opinions, with only 25 percent believing there was no “academic or professional penalty” for expressing their views, the task force said.

Appears that there was more anti-Muslim activities going on than antisemitism.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/30/harvard-taskforces-find-both-anti-semitism-islamophobia-on-campus

[Anonymous]

Widespread sexism and racism exist at virtually every university in the country, much to the chagrin of university leadership. That does not mean that they are not entitled to tax exemptions.

Contrary to your claim, the Bob Jones case turned on the fact that the racial discrimination was part of official university policy and the university refused to take any steps to acknowledge or address it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Appears that there was more anti-Muslim activities going on than antisemitism.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/30/harvard-taskforces-find-both-anti-semitism-islamophobia-on-campus

Everyone can see through your pathetic attempt at crating a false equivalency Claudine Gay. Looks like your ghost continues to haunt Harvard even after they fired your incompetent ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have not read the news about it, but no matter one's opinion, certainly Harvard would litigate something like this. No need to freak out about it.

Exactly. And they have an infinite number of attorneys at their disposal who have rock-solid credibility. Elizabeth Warren and Claudine Gay come to mind.