UPenn president resigns after troubling testimony before congressional committee


She didn’t resign when one of her school’s top male swimmers took away swimming trophies from female athletes earlier this year, but University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill did resign Saturday, just days after her disastrous testimony at a Congressional hearing about campus antisemitism and the university’s tepid response.

Dozens of public officials, donors, and members of the university community had called for her resignation.

“It has been my privilege to serve as President of this remarkable institution. It has been an honor to work with our faculty, students, staff, alumni, and community members to advance Penn’s vital missions,” Magill said in a statement. Magill will remain a faculty member at the university’s law school.

Two days after Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, Magill still failed to issue any statement condemning the atrocities, which included the killing of men, women, and children during a surprise attack. Instead, the university posted a note on Instagram honoring Native and Indigenous people “their culture, history, and importance as members of the Penn community.”

One of the university’s largest donors, Marc Rowan, chief of Apollo Global Management, said on CNBC,

“So this weekend, while 1,200 Israelis were being butchered and murdered and raped, we tweeted as a university about Indigenous Peoples’ Day.” Rowan had given at least $50 million to the university, according to the New York Times.

Then came the campus protests, in which students and some faculty called for the genocide of Jews in repose to the war between Israel and Hamas terrorists.

During a congressional hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York asked the presidents of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University whether calling for the genocide of Jews on their campuses violated institution’s bullying and harassment policies.

Answering Stefanik, Magill said that it was “context dependent,” as it pertains to the university code of conduct.

“If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment,” Magill said. “If it is directed and severe and pervasive, it is harassment.”

“So the answer is yes,” Stefanik said. Stefanik said, “It’s a context-dependent decision, that’s your testimony today, calling for the genocide of Jews is depending upon the context? That is not bullying or harassment? This is the easiest question to answer. ‘Yes,’ Ms. Magill.”

Magill replied, “It can be harassment.”

Her responses to the committee questions were less than satisfactory. In fact, they were so bad that Penn Trustee Board Chair Scott Bok also resigned over the weekend.

On Sunday, the president of Harvard University, also under pressure to resign for her lack of response to the Hamas terrorists and to the campus calls for genocide of Jews, was accused of plagiarizing her dissertation that earned her a PhD.

On Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken reminded America of what had happened to initiate the current war: “The atrocities that we saw on Oct. 7 are almost beyond description or beyond our capacity to digest.”

Speaking to Jake Tapper on CNN, Blinken continued, “And we’ve talked about them before, but the sexual violence that we saw on Oct. 7 is beyond anything that I’ve ever seen, either.”

Watch the congressional hearing on CSPAN at this link.


    • They’re coming. Harvard President apparently faked parts of her PhD dissertation. Drip. Drip. Drip. Cheers –


      • Oh, there’s so much more. She lead a high tech professional lynching (word deliberately chosen because it’s accurate) on Roland Fryer, an acknowledged genius and tenured professor by 30.

        Mr Fryers sin? A black man not on the liberal plantation and threat to her credibility.

  1. ” Instead, the university posted a note on Instagram honoring Native and Indigenous people “their culture, history, and importance as members of the Penn community.””- Depending on the context, no doubt.

  2. As a Penn grad I stopped donating years ago when the Penn president had her photo taken and published with a guy costume dress suicide bomber on Halloween.

  3. You don’t take away the First Amendment Rights for everyone because of a few knucklehead students. Stefanik is more interested in self adoration and attention getting than doing her job.

    • Oh my God “Frank”, this is the profoundly stupidest thing you’ve ever posted.

      Not an achievement to be proud of.

      Let me walk you through this, slowly. Feel free to move your lips.

      -death threats are not 1st Amendment protected.
      -the Hamas animals we’re violating any number of campus rules. Especially disruption of campus.
      -Jewish students (probably not an issue for you) were forced into hiding, many attacked/harassed.
      -campus, state, city, and federal laws were violated.
      -the Jewish students who tried to get official help were ignored, abused, harassed, accused via proxy of being the problem.

      Now let’s be damn clear here, “frank”, not Israeli students. America Jews.

      College campuses of codes of community conduct. Those animals violated them wholesale, as well as many faculty.

      Campus administration not only failed to protect their students, they actively avoided doing so.

      Students who overpaid an overpriced education were denied it.

      The Jewish students have a massive, massive lawsuit to bring on these schools. If there is any justice and anyone with a spine, those three institutions will be bankrupted and forced to close forever

      The alleged Presidents should all be fired and their careers destroyed.

      Don’t believe me. Watch the congressional testimony of some of the students affected. Or even the tap dance the 3 alleged presidents did to try to justify the unjustifiable.

      In a long series of morally and intellectually pathetic statements, you just topped yourself, “Frank”.

      • Have you ever read any of the tripe that you shake out of your sleeve? Absolute nonsense devoid of logic, your comments are driven by fear, televised dreck and OPM.

        Who but you needs to be supportive of anything jewish at all? Note the term supportive, MA. Run your finger underneath the words such that you can grasp their full meaning. There isn’t anything antisemitic about not being supportive of their most recent argument. It’s ok to be ambivalent and it’s generous to be so in reference to an argumentative subset of humanity that has been a drain on society throughout history. They’ve been gifted a place to call their own that is not theirs, arguably not provided by anyone w/ authority to have done so, and have since demonstrated themselves to be needy in every manner imaginable including this wherein they’re feigning injustice and rallying support in an instance where they’re clearly killing their enemy on a scale that meets the very definition of ethnic cleansing. No one needs to give a flying f about them, their hamas neighbors, or their cause as absent this skirmish you can guarantee yourself there will be another right around the corner and who will be at the center? Why, it would be these folks once again. The same group that attempts to promote diversity in your neighborhood but yeah, uh… absolutely not in their own.

        They’ll want more tax dollars and they’ll want you to preemptively support their cause such that no one gets too miffed when they slaughter another zillion that don’t either look exactly like them or think exactly like them.

        …and in your mind it’s all about money. You have swallowed their bs and you adhere to the view that those that don’t support their cause should be “bankrupted and forced to close forever”. That and massive lawsuits and whatever other monetary discipline that might ooze from that steamer in your head.

        Step back for a moment from whomever pays you to think as they do. Supporting either the jews or palestinians or anyone else is not an obligation and a now famous electric car manufacturer had it right when he said that removing (advertising) dollars in order to manipulate public opinion is wrong and those that have done so can go F themselves. Sadly, when you purge your mind of whatever your TV is telling you and consider that freedom of thought is real… you’ll see that you have sided w/ a group that paying for you to espouse a supportive perspective for war crimes and other heinous behavior.

        It’s absolutely shameful and your morality is one no one should adopt. That you assume you have an intellectually superior view when in fact you’re simply regurgitating whatever your TV has told you is the very definition of pathetic.

        Examine morally bankrupt views before you pretend they make sense and foist them on others.

  4. Every person I have met for the last 30 years who was involved in public “education” was either an anti-Semitic, a racist, a communist, a drug abuser, a drunk, or a sexual deviant. All of my family’s children are now in private schools. Destruction to the public brainwashing centers I say.

  5. There are two ways to end the Ivy League, and UPenn in particular.

    1-the upcoming lawsuits should break them. Fiscally and destroy them finically.

    2-stop hiring their grads.

  6. You know the irony here? Brain dead sheep bleat about 1st Amendment rights while the animals riot, but are oddly silent on the kangaroo courts regarding misgendering someone.

  7. Another irony?

    After being lectured and hectored for years by the NFL on “ending racism”, they are remarkably silent on this matter. Even as BLM endorses Hamas.

    Seems some racism is more offensive than others.

  8. There are certain questions that are easy to answer, and yet some people have difficulty doing so. When Bob Costas asked Jerry Sandusky if he was sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys Jerry Sandusky replied: “Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?” Bob Costas said: “Yes.” Jerry Sandusky then replied: “Sexually attracted, you know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them. But no I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.” The answer to the first question is no, you don’t ask the question again and then stammer through an answer, unless of course you are sexually attracted to underage boys and you are a child molester, which Jerry Sandusky has been convicted of.

    In this case the systemic antisemitism seen in these “institutions of higher learning” are on full display in a Congressional hearing. There is one answer to the question if calling for the genocide of Jews is harassment, obviously at a minimum it is harassment and it is likely more than that, much more than that. The fact that the presidents of these institutions cannot and did not answer such a basic question is telling of their beliefs.

  9. I do not have TV so I haven’t seen the atrocity but family members assure me it was gruesome. It was no doubt a step In the right direction for this person to be doing something else going forward.

  10. Now it’s become antisemitic to not say something supportive of jews? Self important whiners that exist due to the largess of others now want more. Who knew?

Comments are closed.