The crisis of anti-Semitism on US campuses reached a fever pitch this Saturday. Liz Magill, president of the University of Pennsylvania, resigned after intense criticism from the White House, legislators and prominent alumni and donors, after speaking at a congressional hearing where she did not outright condemn the glorification of genocide. Jew in his institution.

Magill is the first to fall, but the presidents of Harvard, Claudine Gray, and of MIT, Sally Kornbluth, who appeared with her in Congress and responded in the same evasive manner, are also on the tightrope of this controversy, with similar pressures.

The head of the UPenn board of directors, Scott L. Bok, wrote a message in which he communicated Magill’s “voluntary” decision. “He will continue to be a full member of the law school,” Bok added. Her message included a brief statement from the resignation in which she expressed her gratitude for having been the president of the University of Pennsylvania, one of the eight universities that are part of the elite Ivy League. Bok also resigned shortly after that communication.

Magill shared the Lower House commission with Gray and Kombluth last Tuesday. They were summoned to address the issues of growing anti-Semitism among students since the Hamas attack in Israel took place on October 7, with 1,200 dead and more than 200 kidnapped, and this country launched its massive retaliation on Gaza, causing deaths. of thousands of Palestinians.

The three had been weathering the interrogation, carried out with a markedly accusatory nature in a commission controlled by the Republicans. Until the ultra-conservative Elise Stefanik, who never complained when her idolized Donald Trump used expressions that were more than insulting to Jews, she asked the same question to each of them. “Does calling for the genocide of Jews on campus violate the code of conduct? None of them offered a clear answer, a resounding yes, but rather they resorted to compromises, a yes but…

Instead of the yes or no that Stefanik imperatively and repeatedly requested, Magill replied that the decision “would depend on the context,” which only increased the fury of the legislators present there. “If the speech is direct and severe, penetrating, and becomes behavior, it can be harassment,” Magill explained, trying to fix the mess. He made it even more complicated.

“So the answer is yes?” Stefanik reiterated. “It’s a decision that depends on the context,” Magill responded. “Is this your testimony, that calling for the genocide of the Jews depends on the context?” the legislator said.

Gray responded similarly. “When speech turns into conduct, this is a violation of our policies,” he said. Kornbluth assured that he had not heard those types of comments at MIT and clarified that this rhetoric would be “investigated as harassment if they were persistent and severe.”

That is to say, none of the three responded bluntly with the recognition that this was something intolerable, which is what was being pursued. Stefanik’s five minutes of glory went viral, making her a hero even among Democrats-voting Jews who generally detest her for her defense of all the autocratic values ??that Trump represents.

In a two-minute video posted Wednesday night on platform

“I did not focus on that issue, and I should have, on the irrefutable issue that promoting Jewish genocide is one of the forms of violence against human beings that can be perpetrated,” he said. “It’s simply evil,” she added.

Too late. The storm was already underway. More than 70 legislators asked for the heads of the three and a White House spokesman remarked that the promotion of genocide was something “monstrous and unethical for anyone who represents us as a country.” He even stressed that “it is incredible that this has to be said.”

“Any statement that defends the systematic killing of Jews is dangerous and repugnant and we must stand firm against this, for human dignity and the most basic values ??that unite us as Americans,” he stressed.

In the specific case of UPenn, the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro, maintained that Magill’s response had been unacceptable and called for his immediate resignation, while Ross Stevens, a former student, threatened to withdraw his $100 million donation if he did not. there were reprisals.

Magill’s resignation may be the first domino. Gray and Kornbluth are also in the spotlight. The president of Harvard, in the institution’s student newspaper, has already apologized for her statements. “I got caught up in what had become at that point a lengthy and combative exchange about policies and procedures,” she apologized. “I failed to convey what my truth is,” she added.

Stefanik considered that her work has not been completed and promised that an investigation will be opened “with all the power” on these three universities. “We want them to be held accountable for their failure on the global stage,” he promised.