The pupils of the Harvard Law School agreed that the 53 -billion dollar distribution of the university of “weapons, surveillance technology” and other companies associated with Israel attracts a symbolic coordination that attracted a protest movement that attracted the anger of the Trump government.
Harvard’s administration said last year that it was not sold and the voices of the students have no enforcement, but the step brings back anti-Israel protests to a time when President Alan Garber tries to calm the Republicans to calm the school, including the handling of anti-Semitism.
The move comes days after the administration Pulled 400 million US dollars from Columbia University And immigration officers arrested an organizer of anti-Israel protests. Harvard said last week that it would temporarily freeze the attitude of faculties and employees in relation to federal financing.
“The threats of the Trump government should condemn us for submission, but this referendum shows that these efforts only strengthen our solidarity with Palestine,” said Irene Ameena, organizer at law students for a free Palestine. The note states that 73% of the 842 students who have voted decided a sale. The legal faculty has almost 2,000 students.
Pro-Palestinian students have long called for the universities to shorten the relationships with Israel, trains that were almost exclusively ignored by administrators, even after protests on campus were intensified to the Jewish state and the retribution of Israel in October 2023.
Schools and legislators rejected the boycott, the sale, sanctions or the BDS movement against Israel, considered it as anti -Semitic because it questions the legitimacy of the Jewish state and assumes the policy of a country.
The Harvard Law School said in an explanation that it emphasized the freedom of speech of the students. It added that the administration had no role in the referendum of the student government.
“As explained in a message to the students, the government expressed a deep disappointment with the decision to lead the leadership of the leadership of the students with an unnecessarily split referendum that costs against the declared goals of the student government of” promoting the community “and the” improvement of inclusion “, said Harvard Law.
This story was originally on Fortune.com
