HAA Overseer and Director Candidate Questionnaire Responses

Click the name below to be taken directly to any candidate’s responses to our questionnaire. Voting is open from April 1 to May 19, 2026.

Overseer candidates:

Elected Director candidates:

*Note: Candidates whose names are not linked above did not respond to our questionnaire.

Philip L. Harrison

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Absolutely yes

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Yes, in any way I can

What should Harvard do to protect the ability of international students, faculty and staff to attend Harvard? Harvard should make a strong case for bringing some of the world’s top minds to the United States to study at Harvard and how this ultimately has a hugely positive impact on the country’s economy, educational system, and society. Harvard should then proactively coordinate with the U.S. government on a supportive immigration policy for these talented people to study here and to remain in the country after their degrees are completed. Harvard and the United States both benefit substantially in bringing talent to the country; the discourse should be reframed as mutual interest.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? I believe Harvard should define its mission and values as universal principles, with a goal of depoliticizing higher education’s role in society. Education should not be a polarizing topic. Harvard’s nearly 400 years of extremely positive impact on the United States is irrefutable, and we should confidently communicate this impact and the underlying principles that lead to this impact.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard has a special role amongst its peers to set a global example because it is the oldest institution of higher learning with the most resources. Yes, it should work hard to advance its own position, but it also must lead by example.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should absolutely protect the rights of all students, faculty and staff who are lawfully in the country. The current actions by ICE are untenable for communities, institutions, and, indeed, for the government itself. Cities and institutions need to pivot from playing defense to proactively managing the situation. As distasteful as this may sound, Harvard should coordinate with ICE to establish clear lines of communication, policies and procedures to preempt ICE activities on campus.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Absolutely yes. I believe diversity of all types is a requirement in liberal arts education: geographic, ethnic, intellectual, viewpoint, economic background and more should all be represented on campus. The world is diverse and Harvard’s students and faculty should be similarly so. It is equally important that Harvard cultivate a culture of respect and civility.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I will passionately advocate for all policies, values, and communications that promote freedom and civil liberties while also reducing divisiveness. Civil discourse must be a cultural norm on campus. The campus must be psychologically safe for all students, faculty and staff to share opinions and debate openly and respectfully.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard should work to de-politicize the discourse, reframing the interactions with the US federal government to demonstrate how Harvard’s research outcomes have massive positive impact on the country’s economy and society. Research funding is one of the best investments the government can make. While Harvard must defend itself in the courtroom, it can only win in the long term by communicating a powerful vision and integrating this vision into campus culture.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Yes, Harvard must negotiate with the federal government and settle in some way. Harvard should make a compelling case that is based on universal principles. It should make this case to students, faculty, staff, the general public, and to the government. Harvard should not compromise on academic freedom in its negotiations with the US federal government, but it can and should make tangible steps to reduce divisiveness and rebuild its culture of constructive dialogue.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? No, I am not supportive of Harvard paying a fine, as there is no rational basis for a fine.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Harvard’s alumni are a vital part of the Harvard community. Funding for financial aid is a critical part of Harvard’s success, and this is only possible with strong alumni participation. However, alumni should not be dictating choices for curriculum, faculty, or admissions.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? Harvard is in a challenging position on several fronts, and I would like to help. Through decades of business leadership, I have developed a diverse management and strategic skillset that is well suited to help Harvard navigate these times. Specifically, I have led a purpose-driven organization through growth and change over many years with significant success. I believe that Harvard can emerge from this era stronger than ever, and I would like to help realize this outcome.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? Strong support for liberal arts, interdisciplinary thinking, creativity, and academic freedom. Strong support for a thriving campus culture, a world-class physical environment, and inspiring educational and student life experiences. Reestablishing Harvad as a leader in fostering civil discourse.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Harvard must not be complacent; it cannot rest on its laurels. It should preserve and strengthen aspects of its legacy while it evolves in other ways. Helping to clarify what to preserve and what to change is a key role of the Board of Overseers.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? Civil discourse is essential to Harvard’s success. I believe that the Open Inquiry and Constructive Dialogue Working Group has done very good work. However, I believe its outcomes could be communicated more simply, passionately, and clearly. Harvard must shift to a much more confident, principle-based position, and it needs to shift from defense to offense.

Return to candidate list

Arti Garg

Thanks to Crimson Courage for the opportunity to share my views with your members. So that I can provide the same level of consideration and feedback to all organizations, I will not be answering specific questionnaires from or meeting with individual groups. I have reviewed your website. I welcome the opportunity to learn more about your concerns through any additional materials you share with me.

You can learn more about my views on the role of Harvard and the Board of Overseers related to academic freedom, constitutional and human rights, civil liberties and democracy in our country through:

● My responses to the Harvard Magazine Questionnaire

● My candidacy video produced by Harvard Alumni Association

● My profile in The Harvard Crimson

You can learn more about my broader views and activities related to advancing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion as well as to fostering open, respectful dialogue across differences through publicly available information including:

● Engineers & Scientists Acting Locally’s (ESAL) statement of commitment to Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion(I am Founder and Board Chair of ESAL)

● ESAL articles and events I have published or participated in related to these topics

● My work on the Hayward Community Services Commission to successfully advocate city council to pass a resolution to apologize for its role in perpetuating institutional racism and adopt a workplan to address ongoing racial inequities

If elected to the Board of Overseers, I am committed to approaching all issues before the Board with an open mind and offering advice and oversight consistent with my expertise, experience, and values.

Return to candidate list

Alfredo Gutierrez Ortiz Mena

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes.

Universities exist to pursue truth through disciplined inquiry. Decisions about hiring, admissions, and curriculum must remain within the lawful academic judgment of the institution. External political control over those decisions undermines both academic integrity and institutional legitimacy.

I was educated at UNAM, Mexico’s national public university, which serves hundreds of thousands of students regardless of income. I later came to Harvard as an LL.M. student. Those experiences shaped my understanding of both access and excellence. Institutional independence is not abstract to me—I have seen how quickly it can erode when political actors begin to influence academic decisions.

Harvard must comply with lawful court rulings. But it must never surrender academic authority as a condition of political favor.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Yes—where those dictates exceed lawful authority or attempt to condition funding on suppressing lawful academic expression.

The First Amendment does not bind Harvard directly, but its principles should guide Harvard’s culture. A university committed to excellence protects the broadest possible range of lawful speech.

For twelve years, I served on Mexico’s Supreme Court. I wrote opinions defending minority rights and institutional safeguards. When a constitutional reform eliminated judicial tenure protections and restructured the court’s composition, I resigned because I believed these changes compromised the judiciary’s independence. That experience reinforced for me that erosion rarely begins with dramatic confrontation—it begins with incremental accommodation.

The Board’s role is to ensure Harvard does not compromise speech principles for short-term political expediency.

What should Harvard do to protect the ability of international students, faculty and staff to attend Harvard? Harvard should insist on lawful judicial process before any enforcement action, provide immediate legal resources to affected individuals, coordinate with peer institutions, and communicate clearly and calmly.

I am the only candidate from outside the United States and Western Europe. I have lived what it means to cross borders for academic life—I walked to campus each morning with my Mexican passport in my pocket. Harvard’s research mission depends on attracting the strongest scholars regardless of origin. Protection must be grounded in law, not in symbolism.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Four commitments:

Maintain clear, viewpoint-neutral speech policies.
Enforce rules consistently—neither selectively nor symbolically.
Resist “performative compliance” that trades autonomy for temporary relief.
Preserve institutional voice discipline while protecting individual faculty speech robustly.

Most recently, I taught Constitutional Erosion and Democratic Backsliding at Harvard Law School—a course that examined precisely the institutional dynamics Harvard now faces: external political pressure on autonomous institutions. Democratic backsliding is not a theoretical concept to me. Institutions weaken gradually when rules are bent in moments of pressure. Harvard must resist that pattern.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard should lead. It is the institution best positioned to defend the principle that academic freedom is not a privilege granted by government but a condition of serious inquiry. That means coordinating with peer institutions to resist ideologically motivated funding conditions, developing shared legal strategies, and making the public case—clearly and consistently—that federal investment in research serves the national interest and must not be conditioned on political compliance.

But Harvard’s leadership role does not stop at the national border. Harvard is a global institution by design. Its strength depends on attracting talent, ideas, and perspectives from everywhere. It should model what institutional independence looks like for universities worldwide—many of which face far graver threats to autonomy than anything currently confronting American institutions. Global alumni remain underrepresented in Harvard’s governance structures; strengthening their voice is a governance imperative for an institution whose mission and reputation are genuinely global.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard must comply with valid judicial warrants signed by a court. But it should not grant access to nonpublic areas of campus—residence halls, offices, restricted buildings—on the basis of administrative warrants issued by DHS, which do not carry judicial authority. Harvard should not voluntarily share information beyond what the law requires, and campus officials should be trained to distinguish between judicial warrants that compel compliance and administrative warrants that do not.

Concretely, this means designating trained officials to assess warrants before granting access, providing legal support to affected community members, protecting student records under FERPA, and coordinating with peer institutions to establish shared standards. Voluntary over-compliance is not caution—it is capitulation.

Institutional calm and legal discipline are more protective than partisan escalation.

Diversity strengthens intellectual inquiry. Inclusion strengthens academic legitimacy. A university that excludes talent diminishes itself.

Inclusion pursued with transparency strengthens academic standards and viewpoint diversity. Free speech and diversity are not in tension when properly structured—they reinforce one another.

Harvard must protect lawful protest, enforce anti-harassment policies consistently, provide institutional channels for dissent, and avoid viewpoint-based discrimination. No member of the Harvard community should be shunned, excluded, or targeted because of their ethnic background, religion, or skin color.

I was educated in a public university system built on the principle that academic excellence and broad access are not in conflict. That conviction shapes how I understand institutional obligation: protection and freedom are institutional obligations, not ideological preferences.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Through lawful challenge, coalition-building with peer institutions, and diversification of funding sources.

Short-term funding restoration is not worth long-term institutional subordination.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Only if such a resolution preserves academic independence and imposes no ideological conditions.

There is an important distinction between resolving genuine compliance issues through legitimate legal channels and capitulating to politically motivated demands. A university that trades autonomy for funding compromises its mission. The Board’s role is to ensure Harvard can tell the difference.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Only if legally required—not as a political concession.

Voluntary payment absent a legal obligation signals that funding pressure works as a coercion mechanism. That creates a precedent Harvard cannot afford—not only for itself, but for every research university that depends on the principle that federal funding does not come with ideological conditions.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni should defend institutional independence, avoid factional capture, and engage constructively across differences.

Twelve years on a constitutional court taught me that oversight bodies are most effective when they maintain independence from both the institution they oversee and from external political factions. The Board of Overseers exists to hold Harvard accountable to its mission—not to serve as a vehicle for any constituency’s agenda.

Harvard’s strength depends on disciplined alumni leadership, not ideological mobilization.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? Because I have governed institutions under strain.

I served twelve years on a constitutional court. I resigned when I believed its independence was structurally compromised. I returned to Harvard to teach about democratic resilience—and to study, in the classroom, the very patterns of institutional erosion that Harvard now confronts in real time.

I understand how institutions erode—and how they remain strong. That understanding is not theoretical. It comes from having written binding constitutional decisions, having led a public institution of 38,000 employees, and having walked away from a seat on a supreme court when the conditions for independent judgment were removed.

An Overseer’s duty is not to manage day-to-day policy. It is to protect the conditions that allow serious scholarship to endure across political cycles. The greatest risk is incremental compromise.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? Consistent, principled oversight—particularly in three areas.

First, ensuring that Harvard’s speech and conduct policies are viewpoint-neutral, clearly written, and enforced consistently regardless of which community is affected or which cause is at stake. Second, pressing leadership on whether Harvard’s responses to external pressure—federal, political, or otherwise—are guided by institutional mission rather than short-term expediency. Third, insisting that commitments made by leadership are matched by resources, timelines, and accountability—not announced and then quietly abandoned when attention moves elsewhere.

The Overseers’ value lies in asking the right questions, not in running the institution. I intend to ask them.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Political coercion from outside. Overreaction from within. Inconsistent rule enforcement. Gradual erosion of institutional independence.

These risks are related. External pressure provokes internal overreaction, which produces inconsistent enforcement, which invites further external intervention. The Board must interrupt that cycle with principled, consistent governance.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? I come from outside the American political divide. I am not running as a representative of any faction, coalition, or constituency. I am running because I have spent my career inside institutions that must earn trust under pressure—and because I know, from personal experience, what it costs to defend institutional independence when it is easier to accommodate.

Harvard needs Overseers who understand that the principles it espouses are tested not in comfortable times but in difficult ones. I have been tested. My record is public and open to scrutiny.

In light of your interest in institutional independence and constitutional discipline, I include below the English translation of the formal letter through which I concluded my service on the Supreme Court of Mexico. I include it not as a political statement, but as an example of the principles that guide my approach to institutional governance.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena

JUSTICE

To the Honorable President of the Senate

Senators of the Republic

Mexico City, October 29, 2024

On November 27, 2012, I accepted the honor of serving as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. From the outset, I understood that serving as a constitutional judge entailed more than interpreting legal texts; it entailed sustaining the promise of justice within a democratic state. The Constitution, like the law itself, is not merely a collection of rules, but a structure of principles designed to protect all persons—especially those who lack voice or popular support.

Today I face a constitutional reform that shortens the mandate for which I was appointed. I am presented with two options: to submit to a process of popular election, or to tender my resignation. I do not consider myself a suitable candidate for a position that depends upon popular support. While my record and abilities qualify me for judicial service, the work of a judge—where I believe my vocation lies—is not to validate the will of majorities, but to safeguard the rights of those who most need protection.

For that reason, I have decided to submit my resignation. I do so within the period established by the Seventh Transitory Article of the reform—not because I have discovered in myself a sudden vocation for punctuality, but because the rule is clear: were I not to resign in time, I would fall under the provision of Article 98 of the Constitution requiring serious cause for a late resignation. And although I could improvise a minor tragedy to satisfy that formality, the truth is that I possess no such cause.

It must be emphasized that this resignation does not imply tacit acceptance of the constitutionality of the reform. I proceed in accordance with the presumption of validity that every norm deserves so long as it has not been struck down by a competent tribunal. But, as with so many things in the law, that presumption is provisional, fragile, and perhaps destined to vanish when the Court renders its final judgment. Until then, I will follow the rules in force.

Out of respect for the Constitution I swore to defend, my resignation shall take effect on August 31, 2025. Until that day, I will continue to fulfill my responsibilities with the same integrity I have sought to maintain since my first day in this office.

I resign not as one who abandons an unfinished task, but as one who understands that public offices are temporary loans, conferred to be carried out with dignity for the duration of the charge. The only luxury I allow myself in leaving this position is to do so with the serenity of having been faithful to the constitutional principles that guide this work. In the end, the true triumph is not to cling to office, but to know when to leave it with grace—aware that no one is indispensable, only free.

Respectfully,

Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena

Return to candidate list

Jimmy Biblarz

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes. The ability of universities to determine who teaches, who studies, and what is taught based on academic judgment is one of the core foundations of higher education in the United States. Academic freedom protects the search for truth, the advancement of knowledge, and the ability of scholars and students to pursue ideas wherever they lead.

My own experience as a Ph.D. student in sociology and social policy at Harvard reinforced how essential that independence is to the research mission of universities. My doctoral work examined how neighborhood and school ecosystems shape upward intergenerational mobility—research that required the freedom to ask difficult questions, analyze complex social dynamics, and draw conclusions based on evidence rather than political preference. That kind of inquiry is only possible when universities retain control over their academic decisions.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Yes. Universities must remain places where ideas can be explored, debated, and challenged without fear of political retaliation. If elected as an HAA Director, I would use the role to advocate for Harvard’s continued commitment to free inquiry, open debate, and constitutional protections for members of the university community.

While the HAA is not a governing body, Directors play an important role in representing alumni perspectives and helping shape the broader conversation about Harvard’s mission and values. I would use that platform to support efforts that defend academic freedom and resist attempts by any government actor to dictate the substance of teaching, research, or speech at the university.

My time at Harvard reinforced how essential this global exchange is. As a doctoral student in GSAS, Harvard’s most international school, I studied alongside students from dozens of countries whose perspectives shaped both classroom discussion and the research environment. Later, during my seven years as a resident tutor in Eliot House, many of the students I advised were international students adjusting to life in the United States while also navigating the pressures of Harvard. Their presence enriched the intellectual and social life of the House in countless ways.

Harvard should take several concrete steps to protect this community. The university should continue providing legal assistance and immigration advising for students and scholars facing visa uncertainty. It should advocate for stable visa policies for students and researchers, including working with peer universities and national higher education organizations to press for predictable rules governing student visas and work authorization. Harvard should also ensure that international students have access to housing, financial support, and advising if federal policy changes disrupt their status.

Finally, Harvard should continue using its institutional voice to defend the principle that international academic exchange strengthens both American higher education and the broader economy. Protecting the ability of students and scholars from around the world to study and work at Harvard is essential to the university’s mission and to the vitality of American research and innovation.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Harvard should continue to defend its institutional autonomy through a combination of legal action, coalition-building, and transparent communication with its community.

One important step is strengthening collaboration among universities facing similar challenges. Harvard can help lead coordinated efforts among higher education institutions to defend academic freedom and research independence. This includes working with faculty organizations, civil liberties groups, and research institutions to articulate shared principles and respond collectively when those principles are threatened.

Another important step is maintaining transparency. When universities face external pressure, clear communication about institutional values and decision-making helps build trust within the community and with alumni.

Finally, Harvard should continue investing in programs that promote open inquiry and civil dialogue, ensuring that the university remains a place where difficult ideas can be explored thoughtfully and constructively.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard occupies a unique position in the landscape of American higher education. Because of its history, resources, and global visibility, the university has both the ability and the responsibility to help articulate the public value of higher education and defend the principles that sustain it.

At a moment when universities are facing significant political pressure, Harvard should stand alongside peer institutions in defending academic freedom, research independence, and open inquiry. That means working collaboratively with other universities, faculty organizations, and research institutions to explain clearly why independent scholarship and scientific research matter not only for universities but for the broader public.

Harvard also has an extraordinary global alumni community that can serve as powerful ambassadors for higher education. In recent months, I have heard from many alumni who feel a renewed sense of pride in Harvard for standing up for its principles. Many want to play a role in defending the values that the university represents. Harvard should tap into that energy by engaging alumni as advocates for the importance of higher education, research, and intellectual freedom.

As HAA Elected Directors, part of our role is to help strengthen that connection between the university and its alumni. Alumni around the world can help tell the story of how universities contribute to scientific discovery, economic growth, and democratic life. Harnessing that network of engaged alumni can help rebuild public trust in higher education and demonstrate why institutions like Harvard remain vital to society.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should take clear, proactive steps to ensure that members of its community are protected from unlawful or unnecessary immigration enforcement actions on campus. Universities exist to support learning, research, and open inquiry. Federal enforcement activity that disrupts that environment or targets students and scholars without proper legal process undermines the university’s mission.

First, Harvard should maintain and clearly enforce policies that prohibit immigration enforcement on campus. University police and administrators should be trained to require proper legal documentation before granting access to campus facilities, residence halls, or university records. These procedures should be transparent so students and staff understand their rights and the university’s policies.

Second, Harvard should provide robust legal support for students, faculty, and staff who face immigration-related enforcement actions. This includes expanding access to immigration attorneys, maintaining rapid response legal resources, and ensuring that individuals know where to turn for assistance if enforcement activity occurs.

Third, Harvard should actively advocate at the federal and state level for policies that protect international students and scholars. Universities depend on the global exchange of ideas, and immigration enforcement practices that target students or researchers threaten that exchange.

Finally, Harvard should communicate clearly to its community that it will defend the rights and dignity of all students and scholars who are lawfully part of the university. International students, undocumented students, faculty, and staff should know that Harvard will stand behind them and use every lawful tool available to protect their ability to study, teach, and work without fear of unlawful interference.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Yes. Harvard’s strength comes from bringing together people from a wide range of backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives. A welcoming and inclusive campus allows students and scholars to participate fully in the intellectual life of the university and ensures that the pursuit of knowledge benefits from diverse viewpoints.

This is also personal for me. I came out as gay while I was at Harvard, and the community I found there played an important role in helping me feel that I belonged. I later served on the board of the Harvard Gender and Sexuality Alumni Caucus, and I have remained engaged with efforts to support LGBTQ students and alumni. Experiences like these reinforced my belief that universities function best when people feel respected, supported, and able to bring their full selves into academic life.

During my seven years as a resident tutor in Eliot House, I worked closely with students navigating both academic and personal challenges. Many were adjusting to Harvard while also grappling with questions about identity, belonging, or family expectations. One of the most meaningful parts of that role was helping create a residential community where students felt supported, respected, and encouraged to engage thoughtfully with one another across differences.

Residential communities like Eliot House play a crucial role in fostering the values of curiosity, care, and mutual respect that sustain academic life. Continuing to invest in programs and structures that support diversity, equity, and inclusion helps ensure that Harvard remains a place where talented students from all backgrounds can thrive.

I am also grateful to have received the endorsement of the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard, whose work highlights the importance of maintaining a university community that reflects the diversity of the society it serves.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? If elected, I would support ensuring that Harvard backs its commitments to academic freedom and civil liberties with concrete institutional resources. Protecting these values requires more than statements of principle. It requires sustained investment in the structures that allow all members of the community to participate fully in academic life.

One priority is ensuring that students, faculty, and staff have access to legal and advising resources when their rights are threatened. This includes strong institutional support for immigration and visa advising, legal assistance for students facing immigration enforcement issues, and resources for scholars whose research or speech may become the subject of political pressure.

Another important area is strengthening the advising and support structures that help students navigate Harvard’s academic and residential environment. During my years as a resident tutor in Eliot House, I saw how critical those networks are, particularly for students who may be the first in their families to attend college, students from lower income backgrounds, and international students adjusting to life in a new country. Continued investment in residential life, student advising, and mental health resources helps ensure that all students can fully participate in the intellectual life of the university.

Harvard should also continue supporting programs that foster open dialogue across differences while protecting the right of scholars and students to pursue controversial or challenging lines of inquiry. Institutions like the Safra Center for Ethics, the Edmond & Lily Safra Center programs on democracy and institutions, and other interdisciplinary initiatives can help model how universities sustain both rigorous debate and mutual respect.

Finally, Harvard’s leadership should continue engaging alumni and the broader public in conversations about the importance of academic freedom and civil liberties. Maintaining those principles requires ongoing institutional commitment and a community that understands why they matter.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Federal research funding has played a central role in many of the scientific and medical breakthroughs that have improved lives across the United States and around the world. Efforts to restrict or politicize research funding pose serious risks not only to universities but also to the broader public.

Harvard should continue defending the independence of research through legal channels where appropriate while also working with peer institutions, scientific organizations, and policymakers to protect the integrity of the federal research funding system.

At the same time, the university should continue strengthening its financial resilience by diversifying funding sources, expanding philanthropic support for research, and building partnerships that allow critical work to continue even during periods of political uncertainty.

Ensuring continuity for researchers, graduate students, and early-career scholars should be a priority during any period of funding disruption.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Any agreement should preserve the university’s core academic independence and constitutional principles. Harvard should not accept conditions that compromise its ability to determine who teaches, who learns, and what research is conducted.

Negotiations over funding should focus on protecting the integrity of academic institutions while ensuring that important research can continue. Maintaining those principles is essential to preserving public trust in universities.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Financial settlements should only be considered if they do not undermine Harvard’s independence or establish precedents that could weaken academic freedom in the future. Protecting the long-term autonomy of the university must remain the priority.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Harvard’s alumni community is one of the most powerful and diverse networks in the world. Alumni can play an important role in supporting the university’s mission by advocating for the value of higher education, engaging in thoughtful dialogue about the university’s future, and helping build bridges between Harvard and the broader public.

Alumni also play a vital role in mentoring students, supporting research and educational initiatives, and fostering connections across generations of Harvard graduates.

Organizations like Harvard Clubs, Shared Interest Groups, and alumni volunteer programs create opportunities for graduates to remain connected to the intellectual life of the university long after they leave campus. Strengthening these networks helps sustain Harvard’s global community.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? Harvard changed the trajectory of my life. I grew up in Los Angeles and attended K–12 public schools in LAUSD. When I was younger, Harvard felt distant and abstract, something that existed in books but not in the world I knew. As a high school student, I attended an event hosted by the Harvard Club of Los Angeles. That experience made the university feel real and accessible for the first time. It played a meaningful role in my decision to apply, and ultimately in the path my life would take.

At Harvard I found not only extraordinary academic opportunities but also a community that shaped my intellectual and personal development. I earned my A.B., J.D., and Ph.D. at Harvard, and I remained deeply involved in the life of the College long after graduating. For seven years I served as a resident tutor in Eliot House, working closely with students as they navigated the academic and personal challenges of college. That experience remains one of the most meaningful roles I have held. Helping support students during that formative period reinforced my belief in the power of Harvard’s residential community and the importance of mentorship.

Today I teach at UCLA Law and work as a lawyer, but education and mentorship remain central to my life. I continue to volunteer as a Harvard alumni interviewer and remain active in alumni networks.

I am running for HAA Elected Director because I want to help strengthen the connection between Harvard and its alumni community around the world. Harvard opened doors for me that changed the course of my life. I believe deeply in the university’s mission and in the role alumni can play in supporting it. If elected, I hope to help ensure that Harvard continues to be a place where talented students from all backgrounds can thrive and where the pursuit of knowledge remains open, rigorous, and accessible.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? If elected, my primary focus will be strengthening alumni engagement and helping ensure that Harvard’s alumni community remains connected to the intellectual life of the university.

This includes expanding opportunities for alumni programming, supporting mentorship networks that connect alumni with current students, and fostering conversations across the alumni community about the future of higher education.

I also hope to help strengthen relationships between Harvard and alumni in regions around the world, ensuring that graduates remain active participants in the university’s mission long after they leave campus.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? One of the greatest risks facing Harvard is the erosion of public trust in higher education. Universities increasingly operate in a highly polarized political environment, and misunderstandings about the role and value of research institutions can weaken public support.

At the same time, universities face growing financial pressures, geopolitical tensions affecting international collaboration, and rapid technological change that is reshaping the landscape of knowledge and education.

Navigating these challenges will require universities to defend their core principles while also remaining responsive to the evolving needs of society.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? Throughout my career, I have tried to bring together academic inquiry, public service, and community engagement. My experiences as a student, resident tutor, teacher, and lawyer have reinforced my belief in the vital role universities play in democratic society.

If elected, I will work to ensure that Harvard’s alumni community remains engaged, thoughtful, and committed to supporting the values of academic freedom, intellectual curiosity, and open dialogue that have long defined the university.

Return to candidate list

Salvo Arena

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? I do support the principle that Harvard should retain independence in determining who it hires, who it admits, and what it teaches based on the principles of academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Universities are the engine of education and not centers of politics. Consequently, the academic decisions have to be made by scholars and academic leaders based on education mission and scholarly standards without any influence or pressure by any external constituencies, but at the same time in compliance with the law, and through a rigorous, transparent and accountable process. Harvard has to continue protecting its core ideals through advancing knowledge, educating global leaders, independently of any single agenda, especially if political.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Over the past year, life at Harvard has been shaped by a more complex and unsettled campus climate. At the same time, such challenges have created meaningful opportunities for encouraging renewed commitment to productive and respectful dialogue, and a deeper preparation of students to engage with complexity, to “agree in disagreeing”, and civic responsibility. Viewpoint diversity is a strength that has to be protected and respected. Even when students disagree with outcomes, they deserve a university governed with respect for their voices. In short, I would support resisting any federal directives that undermine the lawful rights of students, faculty or staff to free expression, consistent with protections of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and with Harvard's own commitments to open debate and intellectual pluralism. At the same time, free speech protections do not extent to unlawful conduct such as harassment, threats or discrimination. A different viewpoint should never place a student at risk of marginalization in an academic community committed to pluralism. Harvard’s responsibility should be to protect the integrity of scholarship and the equal dignity of its students.

What should Harvard do to protect the ability of international students, faculty and staff to attend Harvard? Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? About 27% of Harvard students (around 7,000 students) are international from over 140 countries. International students, scholars, and staff are essential to the intellectual life of Harvard. They bring perspectives, ideas, and research collaboration that makes Harvard a truly global institution. Yet visa instability, shifting U.S. immigration policies, and heightened political scrutiny increasingly affect the University’s ability to recruit, retain, and support global talent. In such respect, Harvard should ensure that international applicants have strong and legal administrative support (especially with respect to immigration, visa, travel restrictions issues) and have a legal team that can help with immigration and administrative issues. In addition, Harvard should look at, to the extent possible, active engagement with policymakers to maintain stable visa programs. Harvard should also think about alternative remote programs that can temporarily resolve mobility issues. Protecting the presence of international students and scholars is essential to maintain Harvard as a truly global university. President Garber recently said about the international students: “You are our classmates and friends, our colleagues and mentors, our partners in the work of this great institution. Thanks to you, we know more and understand more, and our country and our world are more enlightened and more resilient. We will support you as we do our utmost to ensure that Harvard remains open to the world”. As someone who came to Harvard from abroad and has a legal background, I would strongly support efforts to ensure that Harvard remains accessible to talents from around the world and that would help, to the fullest extent possible, the international community with respect to legal issues related to immigration and visa.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Harvard has recently taken specific actions that represent a significant step forward to making stronger academic freedom. I make reference to the "Institutional Voice Principles" and the "Open Inquiry and Constructive Dialogue Working Group". Both such initiatives aim to reinforce the university as an open forum for debate. Viewpoint diversity is fundamental to Harvard's mission. Academic progress depends on the testing of ideas, and that process works best when people with different perspectives engage one another seriously and respectfully. Harvard should continue being an open forum where everyone is encouraged to express their opinion and to respectfully agree in disagreeing.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard has always been the leading University in USA and in the world. Everyone, nationally and internationally, looks at Harvard as the lighthouse that guides the high education, shapes the global leaders and contributes to make our society a better place. Such leadership role comes with responsibilities of protecting and sustaining academic freedom, institutional autonomy, the value of research, access to the best global talents, rigorous academic standards.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should be sure that any student, faculty and staff, are protected from any unlawful conduct while fully respecting the law. Harvard policy should contemplate that ICE or other federal agents coordinate with the Harvard University Police Department before enforcement activity on campus. Harvard should maintain legal protocols requiring valid judicial warrants for entry into non-public campus spaces. Also, any interaction between federal agencies and students, faculty, or staff should be coordinated through the legal counsel and the campus police.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Harvard’s commitment to truth, excellence, and opportunity rests on two core ideals: academic freedom and inclusion and belonging. Diversity provides the opportunity to learn from others by exposing ourselves to ideas, and perspectives outside of our own. Academic freedom provides the full exchange of ideas that permits an institution’s diversity to produce new knowledge, new insights, on the assumption that all perspectives are considered and valued. I support diversity in its broadest meaning, including socioeconomic diversity.

When I arrived at Cambridge to attend my LL.M. from Sicily, it was clear to me that, until then, I was just a small piece of a globally diverse puzzle. During my LL.M. program, I had the unparalleled privilege to learn from, and to share with, almost 200 talented students coming from over 70 countries around the world: everyone with a different background, viewpoints, perspectives, personal stories, different races, religion, culture, genders, socioeconomic status, and scholarly methodology. I had never felt such a powerful and enriching diversity of backgrounds and such a deep sense of belonging and inclusion to a diversified “puzzle” of extraordinary people. Given my personal experience, I do hope Harvard’s admission process will continue to uphold the value of a diverse student body.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I grew up in a marginalized area in Sicily, in a place where opportunities are rare, and the future for most is not very bright. Neither of my parents have any education, and none of my siblings or relatives transcend elementary school. But I was raised to believe that education is the quintessential source of opportunity and advancement. Harvard has always been more than an institution to me. It is a place where the rule of law stands as a guiding principle, where excellence, critical thinking, integrity, and morality are the bearing pillars. Harvard is home, it is family. At Harvard, I met some of my dearest friends, I experienced the feeling of being able to achieve unthinkable goals and I laid the milestone of my career. Harvard has truly changed my life. Harvard made “The American dream” possible also coming from a challenging neighborhood in Sicily.

Being part of the Board of Overseers would complete a long journey of unconditional passion, commitment, and a sense of belonging to our Harvard community. It would be my best ultimate way to give back, especially at this time that Harvard has been attacked and shaken. It is time, more than ever, to take responsibility and do our best to preserve and maintain the core values of our University. Given my personal background and my personal beliefs, I would firmly commit to preserve the academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional human rights especially for underprivileged, underrepresented and marginalized constituencies.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Federal research funding has always been an important component in advancing research and education. At the same time, federal research funding cannot limit or have a detrimental impact on the core principle of academic independence that has be always protected. Harvard should also increase the sources of funding, looking at other organizations, especially internationally.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Harvard should engage constructively with any Government administration regardless of the President, or the political party. Open dialogue and attempt to find the appropriate solution should always been considered especially when the outcome might have an indirect impact on students, staff, research and the broader public interest.

On the other hand, any potential agreement should not alter Harvard’s commitment to truth, excellence, and full autonomy and independence.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Please see the previous answer

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? I have spent the past 20 years of my life engaging thousands of alums around the world because I strongly believe that alumni are the best ambassadors for Harvard's core ideals, including academic freedom and institutional autonomy. I have met extraordinary people around the world, unparalleled leaders, thinkers, innovators who shape the society on a global scale and divulgate Harvard's values. Harvard's alumni community is one of its greatest strengths, especially for the sense of belonging that is such a unique characterization of our community. In addition, alumni can contribute thoughtful perspectives and constructive feedback through alumni governance and engagement, helping Harvard remain accountable to its mission while preserving its independence.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? Harvard has always been a global institution: Over 78,000 Harvard alumni are international and live abroad. Currently, the Board of Overseers has only 1 member who grew up outside U.S. and has international roots. I firmly believe that my international legal and business experience, as international and M& lawyer (splitting my time between New York and Milan) and former assistant professor in Italy, together with two decades of service to the Harvard alumni community, can help the Overseers advance Harvard’s strategies.

I do think to be uniquely qualified for the Board of Overseers because of my personal experience and professional and Harvard background.

I have been involved in Harvard relations for over 20 years and my dedication to the University has been felt around the world. A longtime leader of the Harvard Law School Association (HLSA) both nationwide and internationally, I have served in numerous Executive Committee roles since 2004 (including President of the HLSA Worldwide and President of the HLSA of Europe, and graduate school director on the HAA Board of Directors for three consecutive terms). I am currently President of the Harvard Law School Association of New York City, Chair of the Private Equity Share Interest Group, and Governor of the HLSA of Europe. Embracing the spirit of “One Harvard,” I have organized events with programming that blends law with other disciplines, drawing attendance by alums across Harvard Schools. I have been also a catalyst in expanding and revitalizing the organizations of more than 40 HLSA Clubs and SIGs around the Globe. I have organized several annual reunions in Europe (two of them attended by Justice Elena Kegan and Provost John Manning), and conferences in Israel, Lebanon, South Korea, UK, South Africa (and virtually in India, Brazil, Japan, Luxembourg). I have been honored with the HAA Spirit Award and with the Harvard Law School Award. I have spent more than 20 years “raising Harvard friends” around the world, listening to alums from different countries, political affiliations, social classes, religions, genders, sexual orientations, and races. I have been deeply driven by an endless motivation to connect as many Harvard alums as possible because I genuinely believe that our community is an unparalleled network of individuals who can make a difference in this world. I would love to apply what I have learned from so many insightful and thoughtful alumni around the globe to the Board’s activities. More importantly, I am firmly determined to bring the underrepresented international alumni perspectives up to the Board of Overseers and let them to give their contribution to the Harvard's mission and strategies.

As to my profession, I manage the New York office of one of the leading Italian law firms where I am the co-head of the private equity practice and the international practice. I am a dual-qualified private equity and sports lawyer assisting US clients on their most critical cross-border transactions.

Serving Harvard represents my greatest privilege and an extraordinary opportunity to contribute to making Harvard a more inclusive place.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? If elected, I would focus on the following:

1. Representation of International Alumni: Currently, the Board of Overseers has only 1 member who grew up outside U.S. and has international roots. I want to be the Voice of the 80,000 underrepresented international alumni who have such an extraordinary sense of belonging to Harvard and deserve more representation. If elected, I would be honored to bring the perspective and voice of international alumni to the Board. Harvard is stronger when its global community is heard.

2. Be sure that Diversity and Inclusion would continue to be the pillars of Harvard, and Harvard continues being a forum for open debate, neutral, and independent.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Harvard, like many other Ivy League schools, is facing relevant challenges in connection with artificial intelligence. Elaborating transparent, fair and sustainable policies, integrating AI tools and technology in a way to enhance education without causing any disruption, managing the plagiarism phenomenon, rethinking teaching methods and evaluation processes are some of the core issues arising in connection with the increasing adoption and use of Artificial Intelligence. It is unquestionably clear that technology cannot be stopped. But the speed and the applications and implications of the AI are unprecedented and unforeseeable. Despite work, resources, and energy, yet Harvard needs to be more committed in order to fully embrace the empowerment coming out of AI and try to minimize the possible misuse of it.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? I think I have expressed my thoughts in the previous answers. Thank you so much for your important commitment and service to the alumni and to the University. If elected, I would be always available and happy to connect with you and pay attention to your considerations and requests. Thank you. Best regards, Salvo

Return to candidate list

Jeff Tignor

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? As a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Harvard must anchor itself in its core values. To ensure students continue to grow as people and future leaders, Harvard must continue building initiatives that foster communication and relationships across differences. As an Elected Director, I would be excited to work with the HAA and Harvard’s administration to explore the core values that have animated the on-campus community at its best – such as mutual respect, accountability, camaraderie, bravery, and a recognition of shared interests.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? I can only respond broadly to certain questions; as a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

Harvard should lean into its mission as outlined in The Massachusetts Constitution. Chapter 5, Section 2 of the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, which references Harvard, states in part that “[w]isdom and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people…depend[s] on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people…”

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? As a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Yes, I am committed to ensuring that Harvard has a welcoming and inclusive campus and a culture of curiosity, care and respect. In my volunteer service to Harvard, I have seen that as Harvard alumni, we have an opportunity to support current students as human beings. As a longtime alumni interviewer and then Co-Chair of the Schools Committee for the Harvard Club of Washington, DC, I have met many admitted students and their families. Students and families had questions about concentrations, but also finances, roommates, and life on campus. We can more often be resources to support students from our hometowns, or those who have similar academic or professional interests. We can answer questions about internships or listen, with experienced ears, to their challenges and triumphs leading organizations on campus. Building and maintaining those relationships can be extremely rewarding for alumni and valuable for students, providing a perspective from beyond their day-to-day lives on campus.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? As I mentioned above, Harvard must anchor itself in its core values. It must be a community that provides physical safety for all students, as it is not only an academic environment but also students’ home. Again, as an Elected Director, I would be excited to work with the HAA and Harvard’s administration to explore the core values that have animated the on-campus community at its best – such as mutual respect, accountability, camaraderie, bravery, and a recognition of shared interests. Every student must feel a sense of belonging on campus.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? As a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? As a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? As a lawyer with the federal government, our ethics rules limit my ability to comment here on active litigation or ongoing federal investigations in ways that might conflict with positions taken by the government.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? As an HAA Elected Director, I will support increased alumni engagement, including efforts to identify and encourage talented students to apply to Harvard and efforts by alumni to support students once they are on campus.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? My experience as President of the Harvard Club of Washington, DC – the third largest Harvard Club in the world – has prepared me very well for this role. I was Club President during COVID and recognized that building community was even more important than normal under the circumstances. We met people where they were with a variety of in-person and virtual events, indoor and outdoor events – with some events designed just for conversation and others for learning. Our board grew membership to the highest level in the Club’s recent history, at a time when our local alumni community needed us.

I will bring that experience to my role as an Elected Director. I will listen to our alumni to understand what the community needs now and how the community wants to interact with Harvard. In my professional career, I have served in many different administrations. As a lawyer, I am accustomed to having to evaluate and synthesize a variety of different perspectives, often resulting from complex legal and regulatory histories, to solve problems. I look forward to developing initiatives grounded in the many things we have in common as Harvard alumni to grow alumni engagement.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? I want to serve as an Elected Director because I have experienced the benefits personally and professionally of being a part of our amazing alumni community. I want to ensure that each generation of Harvard alumni has a lifelong experience with the University, not just an experience that ends at graduation. It would be an honor for me to be elected to represent my peers as an HAA Elected Director.

For me, the Harvard alumni community means friends, mentors, and continuous learning. I am interested in serving because of my nearly lifelong friendships with my freshman year roommates from Weld 11. We have gone from playing Sega Genesis to being lawyers, academics, business owners, parents, and caregivers to elderly parents.

My Harvard alumni mentors began on campus with government Professor Martin Kilson MA ’58, PhD ’59, who welcomed me into his home as a student, and I continue to grow professionally co-teaching seminars at Duke Law School with Jim Coleman ’70. During my term as President of the Harvard Club of Washington, DC, we welcomed journalists, non-profit leaders, art experts, historians, and many others, to share their knowledge with a Club membership dedicated to lifelong learning.

I believe we have the opportunity to create more spaces for alumni to communicate about experiences in their lives – starting their companies, becoming parents, finding new passions in mid-life. Some of my most meaningful conversations have been with friends who reached out when they saw something in the news that they knew affected me. Those conversations have led to personal and professional growth and the kind of meaningful, lifelong connection to the University that I want for everyone in our community.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Harvard’s biggest risk is its inability to attract the best students. As an HAA Elected Director, I will encourage alumni to become more involved with their local clubs’ Schools Committees, so that Clubs can expand their outreach deeper into their communities. As a co-chair of the Schools Committee for the Harvard Club of Washington, DC for six years, I supported Harvard’s admissions office at numerous information sessions and college fairs. I also conducted local outreach to high schools in the Washington, DC area, along with other alumni volunteers, encouraging amazing young people to apply. All of these efforts helped produce cohorts of admitted students that reflected the breadth and depth of talented students in the Washington, DC metro area.

In light of changing circumstances, Harvard alumni have an opportunity to reshape our volunteer engagement with prospective Harvard College students and with undergraduates on campus. I will work with interested Harvard Clubs, Harvard alumni groups, and the HAA’s Schools Committee, on which I previously served for three years, to develop strategies for alumni-driven outreach. The goal will be to encourage students, from all areas of the country, who may not have otherwise considered Harvard, to apply.

Two other significant risks for Harvard are an unwelcoming campus environment and maintaining a challenging and fulfilling academic environment through the continued growth of AI. The importance of students being able to work and strategize collaboratively and debate constructively is only increased in an environment where wrote processing of information is done by AI. I look forward to working with other Harvard alumni and the University to build initiatives that foster communication and relationships across differences to support Harvard’s academic environment and overall sense of community on campus.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy?

Return to candidate list

Clive Chang

Office sought: Overseer

While I am unable to engage directly with all of your specific questions as a leader of a nonprofit, I am linking my candidate profile, candidate video, the Harvard Magazine questionnaire, my Harvard Crimson profile, as well as the below statement for your reference and consideration.

I am a firm believer in the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion as core ingredients of excellence. Harvard prides itself on being a global center of scholarship and influence. In order to live up to this aspiration, we must promote and celebrate—and also apply consistent standards of inquiry and scrutiny to—as wide an array of perspectives and viewpoints as possible. In welcoming this diversity of thought, Harvard also has a responsibility to ensure the physical, psychological, and intellectual safety of its entire community.

I will use my advisory role to challenge Harvard to maintain its academic independence and integrity in the face of current external pressures. A pragmatist by nature, I will continue to ask the question: ideology aside, how do we ensure our work gets done in a way that aligns with our core institutional values and long-term interests?

As a first-generation immigrant, twice an international student (including at Harvard), a proud member of the LGBTQ+ community, a non-traditional MBA graduate, a classically trained musician, and a nonprofit CEO, I will endeavor to bring the entire breadth of this multi-hyphenate perspective to the table. All that being said, the role of the board of overseers is to advise and advocate through inquiry; our job is not to push any of our own individual beliefs onto Harvard’s decision-makers, but rather to ask the missing or potentially overlooked questions in order to provoke productive contrapuntal dialogue. Somewhere in that polyphony lies our collective ‘veritas’.

Return to candidate list

Trey Grayson

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes. As a private institution, Harvard can, and should, set its own policies on those matters. Of course, those policies and actions, as with any postsecondary institution or employer, must follow all applicable laws. When any presidential administration is acting unlawfully to restrict independence, Harvard should stand up to those actions and pursue litigation, if necessary.

I completely agree with President Garber’s statement: “No government – regardless of which party is in power – should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Yes. I oppose Harvard agreeing to any unlawful federal dictates that undermine free speech, and in my Board capacity, I would fully support Harvard’s leadership’s resistance to such federal dictates.

In general, though, I support Harvard employing faculty and staff and educating students from across the globe and oppose unlawful efforts to restrict those practices. I believe that Harvard should make all lawful efforts to protect their international students, faculty, and staff.

When I was a student, and during my time working at the Harvard Kennedy School as the Director of the Institute of Politics (IOP), I saw and experienced first-hand how Harvard – and the entire Harvard community – benefitted from the presence of international students, faculty, and staff. To paraphrase then Dean David Ellwood, at the Kennedy School, our job was to literally make the world a better place to live. We need – and reply upon – the international members of our community to effectively do so.

During my tenure as IOP Director, we increased the number of international summer internships, regularly brought international visiting fellows to campus, and issued standing invitations to all female heads of state to speak in the Forum. Fortunately, several were able to address the Forum, and those events were among the highlights of my tenure. Working with the HKS alumni office, we also organized a “Forum on the Road” in Paris and held a reception for alumni and students in London.

I support efforts by the Harvard International Office to engage more of Harvard’s international alumni to provide opportunities for Harvard international students, faculty, and staff. Those alumni can be key champions for Harvard in their home countries.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? I support fighting the Trump administration’s attempts to overturn the summary judgment ruling issued by US District Judge Allison Burroughs that prevents the administration from freezing Harvard’s research funding.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? As the oldest and most prominent institution of higher education in America, Harvard should play a leading role in the defense of higher education nationally. That means fighting unlawful actions, but it also means making a better case for the value of postsecondary education. That requires not only better messaging, but also self-reflection – and self-correction – about how one of America’s greatest assets – its system of higher education – came to be viewed so negatively by a growing number of Americans.

By reminding Main Street of the ways higher education contributes to improving and saving lives, sparks creativity and innovation, and promotes how we can and must learn and engage with one another, Harvard could start restoring the trust that it has lost in the minds of so many Americans.

I’ve seen the University of Kentucky do this effectively in my home state by talking about how the research performed by faculty, staff, and students will reduce our high rates of cancer, obesity, and heart disease – something a former UK president called “the Kentucky Uglies”.

In fact, while the Trump administration has tried to cut university research, Kentucky’s Republican Senate President, who represents a number of Appalachian counties, recently proposed investing $150 million into research at Kentucky’s public universities – none of which are located in his senate district – to work together to benefit the state. Harvard could tell a similar story.

Harvard should also consider engaging with the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Council on State Government. Boston regularly hosts those organizations' conferences, which would provide an opportunity for Harvard to sponsor a lunch or program at which it could discuss its value before an audience of several thousand elected officials from across the country. Not only would those members take that knowledge back to the district, many state elected officials end up in Congress where they will be voting on federal research budgets.

In addition to messaging, Harvard should look for opportunities to partner with the well regarded flagship state research universities like Michigan, North Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin, and Georgia Tech, on research and other forms of scholarship. That would spread Harvard’s good work to more of the country.

Harvard should also focus its recruitment efforts in more places. For example, after my stint as IOP Director concluded and I had returned home, I helped the Kennedy School organize a recruitment event in Kentucky and suggested holding similar events at those state government conferences that I mentioned above. That would benefit many of Harvard’s graduate programs, not just the Kennedy School. In addition to boosting enrollment from non-traditional populations, such events would be another way to spread the message of Harvard’s value.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should make sure that its students, staff, security personnel, and faculty have a clear sense of how to engage lawfully with and respond to ICE in ways that protect the campus community.

The administration should focus on protecting the legal and constitutional rights and safety of students, staff, and faculty.

That means responding lawfully to warrants, subpoenas, and immigration enforcement activity, but it also means supporting individuals impacted by immigration enforcement actions, such as detention and deportation, and communicating clearly with the campus community while maintaining compliance with legal obligations.

I grew up in a community – what we call Northern Kentucky, located just across the Ohio River from Cincinnati – with little racial and ethnic diversity. In my graduating high school class of roughly 250 students, I think that we had less than ten non-white students, and all teachers, staff, and coaches were white. Although as a public school, we did see quite a bit of socio-economic diversity; the houses of my friends ranged from single-wide trailers to mansions.

Harvard offered a very different experience, in a good way. I didn’t know anyone at Harvard when I decided to apply and arrived on campus for FOP (First-Year Outdoor Program) only knowing a few incoming classmates from Cincinnati and Kentucky that I had met through the admissions process.

I found myself learning from, interacting with, befriending, and rooming with, students, faculty, and staff from different racial, ethnic, and national backgrounds, religious beliefs (including none), political and ideological perspectives, sexual orientation, and wealth and class (the Prince of Denmark was a visiting student one semester).

These experiences changed my life for the better, encouraging a lifelong curiosity and desire to seek out and promote diversity in all aspects of my life.

I also understood the importance of Harvard prioritizing the sustained work of exposing students, staff, and faculty to diverse people and ideas, promoting spaces of support, respect and interaction, and ensuring that students are treated equally and feel a sense of belonging in the classroom and on campus.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? As stated above, I support Harvard’s efforts to fight the Trump administration’s unlawful efforts to restrict academic freedom. If I were elected to the Board of Overseers, I would regularly ask faculty and staff what they are doing to protect civil liberties, constitutional and human rights, and maintaining an inclusive community for all.

This is particularly important to me because a core tenant of our Episcopal baptismal vow is to “respect the dignity of every human being”. Or as stated more informally in the motto of Trinity, the church that I attend in Covington, Kentucky, “Y’all Means All”.

I learned from and am guided by my time as IOP Director. We were able to build a community of students, staff, and others, including alumni, fellows, speakers, and internship hosts, that worked to respect the values and views of all of our students – no matter their backgrounds or beliefs. We developed new fully funded internships, focused on bringing diverse practitioners to campus, and connected our students with alumni and others who could help them fulfill their professional and personal dreams. We did so in a way that respected the dignity of every human being, and helped to build trust and understanding, rather than in ways that would divide the campus community.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard should continue to oppose and fight against unlawful funding cuts and restrictions that are tied to ideology and coercive demands. Harvard should continue to emphasize and reflect the value and impact of research funding - in improving and saving lives, as a way to build back the eroding trust and support of higher education institutions.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Judge Burroughs ruled the administration’s cuts to research to be unlawful. However, the Trump administration continues to attack Harvard on multiple fronts. Harvard should consider ways in which those attacks could be mitigated in ways that align with Harvard’s mission, purpose and values. We also know that many of the institutions and universities that have made a “deal” with the administration have found that those deals have not insulated those institutions from further attacks and scrutiny.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Before considering any fine, Harvard should closely review the basis for any proposed fine and ensure that the administration has followed the lawful process and made proper findings. Another important consideration is how the fine would be used. Some universities have paid fines directly to the federal government, while others have paid to support agriculture (Cornell) and local workforce development (Brown). If Harvard were to pay a fine, I would prefer something similar to what Cornell or Brown did.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni can assist in several ways. The most obvious is by joining and engaging with many of the official and unofficial Harvard alumni groups. This doesn’t require a lot of effort, although many alumni have given a great deal of time to these efforts. It can simply mean signing onto amicus briefs, such as the one that many alumni signed that was filed in Harvard’s federal litigation. (I was one of those signers.)

Another way for alumni to assist Harvard is to talk publicly about its value and the value of higher education more broadly. Not what Harvard meant for you. But the value to your local communities, the country, and the world.

For too long, proponents of the value of higher education have not made a strong enough case and have too often ceded the debate to others. We all have more of a part to play. The result is dwindling support for higher education and elected political leaders who reflect those views.

Engage with your neighbors and co-workers. Engage with those whose politics differ from yours and with those in other parts of the country. We can no longer afford to remain in the Ivory tower.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? From my time as Kentucky’s two-term Secretary of State, I learned how to find common ground to pass legislation and improve coordination with other branches of government.

My time as IOP Director gave me a unique insight into how Harvard works, as that position required me to engage across all the schools on campus. Too often Harvard is a series of silos – with an operating structure often described as “every tub on its own bottom” – but I found that our best success at the IOP occurred when we overcame those campus silos to collaborate for the good of the students. The IOP is nonpartisan, and I am proud of my work to bring diverse voices to campus during my tenure. From my Board of Overseers perch, I want to encourage and help administrators do that for all of Harvard.

In my bipartisan work for over 20 years to improve our nation’s system of election administration, I regularly work with legislators, election administrators, and other stakeholders to overcome ideological differences to build consensus.

I am a lifelong resident of Middle America. My neighbors are among those who question the value of postsecondary education, government-funded scientific research, and the leadership coming from our nation’s educational institutions, and they are voting for political leaders who share that perspective. It is important that Harvard better understand this perspective to successfully navigate the current challenging environment. I think I can help.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? The Board of Overseers is a unique body that, if properly utilized, can be a tremendous asset. I view the Board as a kind of brain trust that can provide guidance and ask probing questions, while keeping a focus on Harvard’s purpose and mission. We can bring our different perspectives and relationships gained from our personal and professional lives, as well as from our times at Harvard. Given the risks discussed below, it is more important than ever before that University leaders engage the talented and diverse alumni who compromise the Board.

To assist those University leaders, I plan to tap into my different Harvard experiences – that of a graduate, an active alum, a parent of a recent graduate, and a former employee. Given these experiences, I can offer the perspective of an insider who has a better understanding of how Harvard works than a typical Overseer. Yet as a lifelong resident of Kentucky (other than my time in Cambridge), I am an outsider who doesn’t regularly encounter many Ivy League graduates, let alone Harvard alumni.

I also could help with some of the trusted relationships in government that I have developed over the years, as well as offer insights about how to best approach those leaders.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? The biggest short-term challenge is the multi-front battle with the Trump administration that threatens academic freedom. But Harvard faces many other big risks:

(1) Political pressures regarding academic research, international students, antisemitism, DEI, and declining public trust in postsecondary education

(2)Major financial strain from federal funding cuts, new endowment taxes, fundraising strain from the loss of some longstanding donors, as well as rising operating costs

(3) The rise of AI

(4) Concerns about maintaining (or in some cases restoring) academic rigor while promoting more “productive disagreement.” (I’m excited about HKS Professor Julia Minson’s work in this area.)

Fortunately, Harvard has a strong endowment that can help cushion the financial transition, brilliant faculty, dedicated staff, talented students, accomplished alumni, and a nearly 400-year history of scholarship and education that has made America and the globe a better place. Throughout that history, Harvard has constantly adapted and reinvented itself to meet contemporary challenges. I have confidence that it can rise to meet the challenges of today.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? First, it is an honor simply to be nominated. I still remember visiting Boston for a family vacation and taking my first ever subway trip – the Red Line from Park Street to Harvard Square – to take an historic tour of Harvard. That trip sparked a dream for this Kentucky public school student that ultimately led to four years in Cambridge that changed my life in so many ways.

As a result, I feel a debt of gratitude to ensure that Harvard continues to positively impact and support the lives of its students and the world at large. That is why I have devoted so much time since graduation assisting Harvard in various capacities despite the 900-mile distance from my Kentucky home, including my return to campus with my family in 2011 to serve as director of the Institute of Politics, my undergraduate extracurricular home, to provide some much-needed stability and direction.

As Harvard approaches its 400th anniversary, I feel a call to serve in such an important capacity to ensure that Harvard remains the world’s leading institution of higher education. While Harvard has faced challenging times on many occasions in its history, the current situation may be its most difficult, with a broken fiscal model, campus divisions, too many Americans questioning its value, and the Trump administration’s actions threatening its academic freedom.

While Harvard has made mistakes, I appreciate the efforts of President Garber to try to right the ship and want to assist him and the rest of the school’s leadership. I believe that I have some experiences and insights that can assist.

Return to candidate list

Medha Gargeya

Office sought: Elected Director

I am grateful for Crimson Courage's outreach. As the daughter of a college professor, lawyer that has advised and defended universities, servicemember, and instructor on ethics and oversight, advancing academic freedoms, democratic principles, and the rule of law guides my work. Though I will not be completing the questionnaire, I hope my public materials indicate what I aim to contribute to HAA and would welcome a conversation with Crimson Courage's team.

Return to candidate list

Allison Charney

Office sought: Elected Director

I am grateful to the leadership of Crimson Courage for graciously allowing me to submit this statement explaining my decision not to provide written answers to their formal questionnaire.

During this last decade of tumult in higher education, much of my Harvard volunteer time has been dedicated to my position as Co-Chair of the Harvard Club of NYC's alumni interviewing committee. I also serve as the President of the Foundation Board, the club's philanthropic arm that supports many schools, communities, students and initiatives at Harvard. Because this volunteer work touches upon so many highly visible departmental “tubs” at Harvard, I feel I must maintain my public neutrality, even if it makes me ineligible to receive endorsements from alumni groups. To maintain consistency in this process, I have recused myself from submitting written answers to any group’s questionnaires.

I have gladly made myself available to the leadership of each alumni group for one-on-one conversations—a practice I look forward to continuing if elected. Although the role of HAA Director is not one of University governance, it would afford me the opportunity and responsibility of communicating the views of Crimson Courage - and all alumni constituencies - to the leadership of the Alumni Association. So, maintaining these open lines of dialogue will be a top priority for me.

My professional work as a musician and my many Harvard volunteer roles have all been rooted in my desire to nurture vibrant communities that emphasize artistic and academic freedom and intellectual diversity. I strive to cut through the noise to amplify truth and beauty, and to build bridges across differences. As HAA Elected Director, I would be honored to continue these efforts while helping to bring your voices directly to the University.

Return to candidate list

Teresa Clarke

Office sought: Overseer

With regard to the to overseers election, I am the long-standing Executive Editor of Africa.com, a news platform at the center of various media assets that reach millions of readers each month. As you know, news organizations have policies prohibiting their editors and writers from publicly expressing personal opinions about political matters. As such, I must refrain from expressing any views that could be interpreted in that manner.

I am sorry that I cannot respond to your questions. Please know that I have also turned down similar requests from the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard, Harvard Jewish Alumni Association, Harvard Alumni for Free Speech, and other alumni groups.

I have referred alumni groups to a website I created for this election, ClarkeForOverseer.org. The website provides a robust set of publicly available materials, including videos, that provide voters with a deeper sense of how I would approach the role of overseer, should I be elected to serve.

In addition, the website has a page on my views on various issues of importance to voters, Issues.

Return to candidate list

David Lefer

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? I absolutely support Harvard’s independence to make hiring, admissions, and curriculum decisions, without coercion.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? I would indeed oppose any agreement that violates Harvard’s constitutional right to free speech. One thing I’ve been struck by over the past year and a half is the number of large corporations that have genuflected to the administration while telling employees they are just following the law. This is disingenuous, since executive orders are not actually laws. There may be financial consequences for not following them, but it cannot be claimed that there is a legal obligation to follow them. I would expect Harvard to fight for its constitutional rights.

What Harvard should do in the short term is clear. Aggressive litigation is vital, and Harvard did successfully obtain a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration. What it needs to do to win in the long term will require sophisticated strategizing. As an Elected Director it would be my role to seek out strategic ideas among alumni and share these with the HAA and Harvard.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? I recently had the pleasure of meeting Jennifer Selendy, whose firm Selendy Gay, is representing Harvard. I can confirm we are in good hands legally. Harvard has firm constitutional ground to stand on in its complaint, which charges the administration with trying “to coerce universities into undermining free speech and academic inquiry in service of the government’s political or policy preferences.” I would support continuing to battle the government through the courts, and given Harvard’s budget constraints, raising money to help pay its legal fees may be something the alumni could help do.

But again, I want to be mindful of long-term strategy. At a talk I attended at the Harvard Club of New York, Jaime Gorelick, the Deputy Attorney General under President Clinton, made clear the dangers Harvard still faces. As she put it, Harvard could well win all its legal battles and still lose the war against Trump. Beyond a legal strategy, Harvard needs to articulate a strong political strategy, and here again is something alumni could help with immensely. As an Elected Director, my role would be to seek out whatever advice our fellow alumni can offer.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? For better or worse, Harvard is the cynosure of American education. Whither Harvard, whither the Academy. As Jennifer Selendy told me the other night, if Harvard hadn’t stood up to the Trump administration, the rest of America’s universities would have folded as well. That’s quite a burden to put on a single university, but it’s also an opportunity for Harvard to live up to its motto and fight for Veritas. I am so proud of our alma mater. Now is the time for the alumni to step up to help.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? I would leave this question up to Harvard’s legal team and its police force. Needless to say, all students, faculty, and staff need to be and feel safe.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Having worked as a professor for almost 20 years, I have seen firsthand how important diversity, equity, and inclusion are in higher education. Harvard is no exception. Time and again, especially in my own field of innovation and entrepreneurship, I have seen more diverse groups outperform less diverse ones. Over the past decade I have, in fact, devoted my career to studying diversity, equity and inclusion. My National Science Foundation-funded research, which focuses on diversity in innovation and entrepreneurship, has shown repeatedly that diverse teams, whether in terms of gender or race, come up with both greater numbers of solutions and more creative solutions to problems. The concept of “psychological safety,” pioneered by Amy Edmondson at Harvard Business School, is particularly fascinating to me. Edmonson has shown that it’s not enough for students merely to be diverse. To benefit fully from diversity, they also have to feel psychologically safe within their environment. For Harvard, that means creating an atmosphere where students feel not just accepted, but also deeply respected and valued.

As explained to me by the HAA, my role as an Elected Director would be to speak with alumni, find out what our concerns are, and report back to the HAA. Harvard does listen to its alumni, and my role, as an Elected Director, would be to tell the university what we alumni are saying. I would also make sure it knows what my own and others' research has found.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? Before I became an academic, I worked as a journalist for nearly a decade, both as a newspaper reporter and TV news producer. I made sure to use these platforms to fight for civil liberties, especially freedom of speech. My favorite class at Columbia’s Graduate School of Journalism, in fact, was a Columbia Law School course we were all required to take on First Amendment law. I not only received the highest grade in the class but also won an award at graduation for my work in it.

I mention this because of the outsize impact this experience had on my subsequent career in journalism. As an investigative reporter for the New York Daily News, I won praise for a series of articles on then-Mayor Giuliani’s attempts to infringe on his political opponents’ freedom of speech. In the process I got to interview and work with some of the leading First Amendment lawyers in the country, including Floyd Abrams and James Goodale, The New York Times’s lawyers during the Pentagon Papers case. I may also be the only reporter in Daily News history to have quoted Milton’s “Areopagitica.”

As a professor I am deeply committed to preserving academic freedom. The current assault on higher education is not limited to Harvard, although Harvard is taking the brunt of it. These are dangerous times, and the stakes could not be higher. My own research at NYU has been affected by the Trump administration, and I have little doubt my current grant studying diversity in entrepreneurship is not going to be renewed in its current form. One of my roles at NYU is Co-Director of the university’s Institute for the Convergence of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, where I have been co-PI (Primary Investigator) on multiple multimillion-dollar grants from National Science Foundation. I have taught numerous courses on innovation and entrepreneurship that have served as the basis for a multi-year study of female- and minority-led startups, and I have overseen grants awarded to top female and minority-led startups. One thing I’m especially proud of is that NYU’s School of Engineering, where I teach, was less than a third female when I started, and is now approaching 50%. My students are also incredibly diverse, and working with such talented young scientists and engineers from all of the world has been one of the highlights of my career.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard’s decision to fight these cuts through litigation is the right strategy. Given the magnitude of the cuts, however, more action is needed and it is needed quickly. Again, alumni donations may be an essential part of keeping the lights on, but I do not think they will be enough. As an Elected Director I would make sure to canvass our alumni for more ideas.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? It depends on what’s in the deal. From what I have read, Alan Garber was ready to make a deal until Harvard received a late-night email from the White House demanding control of university governance. That’s when Harvard decided it had to fight back. Whatever Harvard does, it needs to be aware that it will set the tone for all of higher education. It cannot be perceived to be giving in to extortion.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? I honestly don’t know. As long as Harvard doesn’t admit culpability, I’m not sure paying a fine in exchange for restored funding would be so terrible. The devil is in the details, and I would need to know more.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni are vital for upholding Harvard’s moral high ground. While it may be tempting for Harvard’s administration to want to end the war the government started, from what I understand it also realizes higher principles are at stake. Alumni pressure can help keep Harvard from buckling. At the same time alumni need to step up by offering donations and advice. Having gone to Columbia for graduate school, I was disappointed by how readily that university capitulated to the Trump administration. We alumni need to remind President Garber to “fight fiercely, Harvard,” and I am proud that we continue to “fight, fight, fight.”

On a personal level I have been trying to help Harvard as treasurer of my family’s educational foundation. For the past year I have been in discussions with Harvard over ways we can help the university, and one path we are exploring is through supporting the new intellectual vitality initiative, which is devoted to ensuring students are exposed to a diversity of ideas and viewpoints.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I was both surprised and honored to be nominated to run for the HAA. I’ve been involved with Harvard in many ways since graduating, interviewing college applicants for more than a quarter century, chairing my interviewing committee for six years, and serving as a member of the class of 1993 Gift Committee, which broke the Harvard College Fund record for amount raised for a 30th reunion campaign. But I have never been deeply involved with the HAA specifically.

When I was first nominated, I was told I would serve in alumni outreach, listening to alumni and trying to understand their concerns. I can’t think of a role I’m better suited to. In my decade as a newspaper reporter and TV producer, listening to and learning from others was my full-time job. As a startup founder and professor of entrepreneurship for two decades, I teach my students the vital importance of talking to potential customers to understand their needs. I’ve also authored two books on US history, and the hours I’ve spent in archives and libraries have honed my research skills. In short, I’ve spent my life trying to get the real story. I'd be happy to share my skills and experiences with Harvard.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? The best way I can lead in this role is to follow the will and advice of the alumni. I am aware, though, that I cannot just assume I know what the alumni want. I will need to meet with alumni, listen to them, and understand them, and I am ready to travel the country to do so. I don’t think the way to lead is just to visit Cambridge a few times a year to sit in meetings. This is a role that requires both outreach and the ability to turn listening into action.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? As Jamie Gorelick put it, Harvard could win all its legal battles and still lose the war. As she made clear when I chatted with her after her talk, the government has numerous weapons in its arsenal that it can use to punish Harvard. As soon as Harvard responds to one threat, the government launches another one. What it comes down to is time and money. Does Harvard have enough to outlast the current administration? And does it have a long-term plan in case someone from the current administration wins the White House in 2028?

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? Over the past 30 years, I have devoted my career to two things: learning to listen and to synthesize what I have heard, and also to fighting for freedom of speech, both as a journalist and as a professor. I would bring this ethos with me as an Elected Director.

Return to candidate list

Mia Alpert

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes, absolutely. Harvard should be able to admit students and hire or promote faculty based on its own determination of scholarly merit and institutional need. Harvard should also be free to set its own academic standards and determine curriculum without political interference. When governments dictate who teaches, who learns, or what is studied, universities cease to be centers of truth-seeking and instead become instruments of political power. To achieve the aims of Veritas, the university must be structurally protected from the whims of any political moment. I support Harvard's authority in all of these domains and oppose external coercion.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Yes. Free speech and open inquiry are inseparable from Harvard's core academic mission. Any federal dictate that conditions funding, accreditation, or legal resolution on the government controlling what can be said, taught, or researched on campus is a direct threat to that mission, and I would certainly oppose it. I also want to clarify what I mean by "free speech”, as the term is sometimes weaponized in contradictory directions. I believe in protecting the speech of faculty pursuing controversial research, students exploring uncomfortable ideas, and staff raising legitimate concerns — regardless of whether that speech is politically convenient at any given moment. I also believe that consistent, clearly articulated and uniformly enforced standards around conduct (distinct from speech) are essential to ensuring all members of our community can participate fully in campus life. Protecting free expression and protecting people from harassment are not in conflict; both are requirements of a functioning academic community.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Harvard should refuse to capitulate preemptively in anticipation of federal demands that have not yet materialized and may never be legally enforceable. Preemptive surrender of institutional autonomy in the hope of avoiding worse outcomes is both strategically shortsighted and ethically corrosive — it invites further demands and signals that Harvard's values are negotiable. At the same time, protecting Harvard's independence requires genuine institutional integrity. The University's credibility in resisting external political interference is strongest when its own governance is transparent, its standards are consistently applied, and its internal culture genuinely embodies the pluralism and open inquiry it defends in public. The goals of defending against external threats and improving internal governance are not in tension, they reinforce each other.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard occupies a unique position in American higher education in terms of resources, reputation, and symbolic weight. When Harvard leads, other institutions follow — and when Harvard capitulates, it gives cover to others who lack the resources to resist. The University should use its platform actively and in collaboration with other institutions to challenge unlawful federal overreach, to articulate a compelling public case for why academic freedom matters to democracy, and to provide practical support (legal, financial, and moral) to smaller and less well-resourced institutions facing the same threats. This means Harvard leadership must be willing to speak plainly and publicly, not only in carefully worded legal filings, but in ways that educate and mobilize the public, alumni, and lawmakers about what is genuinely at stake. American higher education is not a partisan issue, it is a public good with almost four centuries of documented contributions to American life, economic vitality, and democratic culture. Harvard should make that case vigorously, across multiple platforms, and with the support of its global network of alumni and other stakeholders.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should follow and enforce all legally available protections for its community members and should be transparent with its community about what those protections are. This means clearly communicating to students, faculty and staff what their rights are in any encounter with immigration enforcement (or other law enforcement), training campus personnel on how to respond appropriately when enforcement agents arrive, requiring judicial warrants before allowing access to non-public campus spaces, and designating legal resources that community members can contact immediately in an emergency. Harvard should also be clear that unlawful conduct by federal agents (detentions without legal basis, intimidation, or actions taken in violation of established legal process) will be legally challenged and publicly documented. The University has legal standing, significant resources, and an obligation to use them in defense of its community members. Beyond legal defense, Harvard should engage proactively with federal officials and policymakers to make clear that targeting international scholars and students is harmful, unlawful in many cases, and contrary to the national interest.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Yes. I chose to come to Harvard as an undergraduate in large part because I wanted to join a community defined by genuine intellectual and human diversity in which I could grow and thrive. Harvard delivered on that promise for me, and I have spent the better part of the last three decades, through Harvardwood and other volunteer leadership roles, working to provide resources and cultivate spaces for belonging so that students, alums and others can create their own success. To me, diversity is not a performance or a metric; it is the substantive condition of being in authentic community with people who are genuinely different from you — in background, worldview, lived experience, and opinions. Equity means meeting students where they are and removing barriers that have nothing to do with merit so they can develop to their fullest potential. Inclusion means ensuring that every member of our community feels not merely tolerated but genuinely welcomed as a full participant whose perspective enriches the whole. A culture of curiosity, care and respect is not in tension with rigorous intellectual engagement — it is an essential component. Students cannot learn from people whose fundamental humanity they are unable to recognize, and scholars cannot pursue truth in an environment of fear or exclusion. I will advocate for all of these things, through both institutional levers and the modeling of what I want to see in the broader alumni community.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I am, of course, supportive of these values as foundational components of the University’s mission. However, abstract commitments to academic freedom and civil liberties mean very little to a graduate student whose visa is under threat, a junior faculty member who is uncertain whether dissent is safe, or an undergraduate from a low-income family struggling to navigate a campus with unwritten and opaque codes of belonging. Through my work at Harvardwood, involvement with the Mission Hill / PBHA community, personal philanthropy and years of mentoring students from all kinds of backgrounds, I have seen clearly that the gap between Harvard's stated values and the lived experiences of many of its community members remains real and significant. I plan to help close that gap — through advocacy for specific policy improvements, transparent communication about where the University falls short, and the kind of individual relationship-building and coalition work that I have found, over many years, to be the most durable driver of institutional change.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard's first response should be legal and principled — challenge unlawful funding restrictions through every available channel, make clear that ideologically-conditioned grants violate the basic norms of academic inquiry, and do so in coalition with other affected institutions, universities, and the broader scientific/research community. Silence, preemptive acquiescence or passive compliance signals that the University's commitment to independent research is subject to political convenience. Harvard's second response should be structural — the University should use this moment as a forcing mechanism for the diversification of research funding that has been long overdue. This means aggressively cultivating philanthropic support for research across a wide range of disciplines and funding sources, building stronger international research partnerships, and working with public and private stakeholders to build a broader political constituency for federal research investment that is not dependent on a single administration's goodwill. The federal research enterprise has benefited American science, public health, national security and economic productivity for generations. Making that case forcefully, publicly, and in terms that reach beyond academic audiences is part of Harvard's responsibility as the most prominent research university in the world.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? No, not if it means compromising the core principles at stake. Harvard has legitimate reasons to want funding restored, and there are painful costs to researchers, students, and communities that depend on Harvard-based science and public health work — but a deal that requires Harvard to cede control over hiring, admissions, curriculum, or academic culture would cost more than it is worth. It would set a precedent, both for Harvard and for every other institution watching, that academic independence is transactional. Harvard should be willing to engage with the federal government on legitimate policy questions, and it should be willing to make genuine reforms where internal critics (not just external political actors) have identified real problems — but it should not negotiate away its foundational autonomy in exchange for funding. The endowment and the institution's global philanthropic network exist (and must be reinforced) for moments like this one.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Paying a fine would implicitly concede that Harvard has done something illegal. Harvard has in fact been undertaking real internal reforms (on governance, campus culture, how it handles conflict), and that deserves acknowledgment. But reform undertaken in good faith to strengthen an institution is categorically different from an admission of legal wrongdoing. The existence of problems worth fixing does not mean laws were broken, and Harvard should not allow those two things to be conflated. Paying a fine under these circumstances would be an act of submission disguised as compromise, and it would set a precedent (for Harvard and for every other institution watching) that academic independence is transactional. It would also invite further demands. If there are specific, legally grounded findings of actual violations, that is a different matter governed by legal process — but that is not the situation as I understand it. A fine paid to make a political dispute go away is a ransom, not a legal resolution, and Harvard should not pay it.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? As alumni, we have more leverage than most of us use. We vote (and more of us should vote!) for members of the Board of Overseers, contribute financially, mentor current students and carry Harvard's name and reputation in our professional and civic lives every day. All of these are forms of influence, and all of them can be deployed in defense of the values we care about, like academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Alumni should stay engaged and informed, not just through official communications but by actively seeking out a wide range of perspectives on what is happening on campus. We should make our voices heard through the democratic mechanisms available to us, including these very elections. We should be willing to give generously, and to be specific about what our giving is meant to support. And we should model, in our own communities and professional lives, the culture of rigorous open inquiry and genuine pluralism that we want to see at Harvard. I also think alumni have a particular responsibility to stay engaged even (especially) when the news from Harvard is frustrating. The temptation to walk away is understandable, but the institution is shaped by who chooses to remain in the conversation.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I am running because I believe this is a moment that demands active engagement from alumni. I have spent nearly three decades building community, fostering belonging, and working at the intersection of institutional mission and human experience — through my role as founder and longtime President of Harvardwood, my board service at United Friends of the Children and UCLA Lab School, and other professional and volunteer roles throughout my life. I have a history of sustained engagement across multiple Harvard communities, experience in nonprofit governance and organizational leadership, and a track record of building inclusive communities. I am also committed to the kind of civil, intellectually honest, cross-difference dialogue that I believe Harvard needs more of right now. I am deeply curious, open to change, and hold views that don't fit neatly into any political camp — I consider that an asset rather than a liability. I believe in academic freedom, diversity, institutional independence and genuine accountability. I believe in protecting the most vulnerable members of our community and in maintaining the high standards of rigorous inquiry that make this community worth protecting. I intend to bring that integrative perspective to every aspect of this role.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? If elected, I would focus on three interconnected priorities. First, I would look to strengthen alumni engagement and connection — not just with the HAA as an institution but across the full breadth of Harvard's global alumni community, including the many alumni who have felt disconnected or underserved (as many alums in the arts did, prior to Harvardwood’s founding). Second, I would amplify the voices of community members including students, faculty, staff, and alumni who are most affected by the challenges Harvard is currently facing, and I would work to ensure that the University's decisions reflect a genuine understanding of those impacts. Third, I would advocate for the reforms and cultural changes that will make Harvard more resilient, more transparent, and better equipped to fulfill its mission over the long term — not just in response to this political moment, but for generations to come.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? The most immediate risk is the one that is already at hand, namely sustained political pressure that, if met with capitulation rather than principled resistance, could fundamentally compromise Harvard's independence, damage its international community, and set precedents that harm higher education broadly. The second risk is internal — that in the effort to respond to external pressure, Harvard loses sight of the genuine work that needs to be done to strengthen its own governance, reduce self-censorship, broaden its culture of intellectual pluralism, and close the gap between its stated commitments to inclusion and the actual experience of its community members. The third risk is financial and structural — too much dependence on federal research funding and a small number of large donors creates vulnerabilities that have now become acute. Harvard should use this moment to diversify its funding base, deepen its philanthropic relationships across the full spectrum of the alumni community, and build the long-term financial resilience that will allow it to make affirmative decisions based on its values. Underlying all of these is a cultural risk that Harvard becomes so polarized internally that it loses the capacity for the honest, constructive, truth-seeking dialogue that is its reason for being. I do not foresee that happening, but we as alumni have an important role to play in preventing that outcome.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? I believe that the best defense of academic freedom is a Harvard that is genuinely excellent — not merely prestigious but truly committed to the pursuit of truth across the full spectrum of human knowledge. That means resisting external political coercion and doing the hard internal work of building a community where all of its members can participate fully, think freely, and contribute their best. I do not think these are competing goals, I think they are the same goal approached from different directions. A Harvard that capitulates to federal overreach is not worth defending — but a Harvard that defends its autonomy while allowing self-censorship, exclusion, and dysfunction to fester internally will not be able to sustain that defense for long. Both fronts matter, and I intend to work on both. I have deep love for this institution, and I have great respect for the alumni who are showing up to fight for it right now, across many different perspectives and approaches. I look forward to being a collaborative, constructive voice in that conversation, and I would be honored to earn your support.

Return to candidate list

Jakob Haesler

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes! In line with its motto “Veritas,” Harvard must remain autonomous in its pursuit of truth and excellence in teaching and research. This autonomy includes the authority to decide whom to hire to teach, whom to admit to learn, and what is taught. Such independence is essential to safeguard academic freedom, foster intellectual diversity, and ensure that knowledge advances without undue external influence, while remaining grounded in principles of fairness and academic integrity.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Free speech is a fundamental principle enshrined in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As an Elected Director, I would use my voice to challenge any attempts by the federal government or other external entities to impose constraints that undermine the free speech rights of Harvard’s students, faculty, and staff. I would also oppose Harvard agreeing to such limitations, while recognizing the importance of upholding the law and fostering a respectful, inclusive academic environment.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? The most effective way for Harvard to respond to external demands that may infringe upon academic freedom, civil liberties, and institutional autonomy is to strengthen these principles within its own community. This includes fostering open and rigorous dialogue, ensuring that diverse perspectives are heard, and promoting a culture of respect for differing viewpoints, alongside a continued commitment to research and academic excellence.The most effective way for Harvard to respond to external demands that may infringe upon academic freedom, civil liberties, and institutional autonomy is to strengthen these principles within its own community. This includes fostering open and rigorous dialogue, ensuring that diverse perspectives are heard, and promoting a culture of respect for differing viewpoints, alongside a continued commitment to research and academic excellence.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard already plays an important role in representing and supporting the broader higher education sector. It should continue to do so with both determination and humility, using its voice and institutional strength to advocate for academic freedom, access to education, and the value of research. In doing so, Harvard can help support institutions that may not have the same resources or visibility.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should take all appropriate legal measures to protect its students, faculty, and staff from any unlawful conduct by ICE or other authorities. This includes clearly asserting its rights as an institution, providing guidance and support to its community, and ensuring that any enforcement actions on campus comply fully with the law. Harvard should be prepared to respond firmly and promptly to any violations.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Yes. A welcoming and inclusive culture—where all members of the community feel respected and supported—is fundamental to Harvard’s mission. It enables individuals to thrive and strengthens the pursuit of excellence through diverse perspectives. Harvard should continue to invest in diversity, equity, and inclusion, while attracting and developing talent from all backgrounds.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I would like to answer this question with a concrete example from my service to the Harvard alumni community. As Chair of the Harvard French Scholarship Fund, I redirected the fund’s focus toward identifying and mentoring outstanding high school students from underserved and economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and supporting their participation in the Harvard Summer School through fully funded scholarships.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard is already responding to these cuts, including through legal action where appropriate. When restrictions are unlawful, the courts should play their role in addressing them. Beyond this, Harvard should remain firmly focused on its core missions of research and teaching, and be prepared to forgo funding that comes with conditions that compromise academic integrity or institutional independence.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Harvard should pursue all reasonable avenues to restore its federal funding, including constructive engagement where appropriate. However, it should not enter into any agreement that compromises its commitment to academic freedom or institutional autonomy.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Harvard should not agree to pay a fine as part of a negotiated arrangement with the government. Only if it were found by the courts to have violated the law should a fine be considered as part of a legal resolution.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni have an important role to play in supporting Harvard’s academic freedom and institutional autonomy. They should publicly affirm the University’s core values, true to its motto “Veritas,” and serve as ambassadors for these principles. They can also model the behaviors that sustain them—engaging in open, respectful dialogue, expressing their views freely, and demonstrating the ability to disagree constructively. In addition, alumni should bring their perspectives back to the University in a constructive and thoughtful manner, contributing to ongoing dialogue and helping strengthen Harvard’s commitment to these ideals through mentorship, advocacy, and engagement.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I am running to continue serving the Harvard alumni community and the University more broadly, building on many years of engagement in alumni leadership. I have served as President of the Harvard Club of France, an Appointed Director of the HAA Board, Chair of the Harvard French Scholarship Fund, and a member of the HKS Alumni Board.

Throughout these roles, I have sought to act as a bridge builder, bringing together alumni of diverse backgrounds and perspectives to ensure that all voices are heard. I believe this ability, combined with my international background as a German living in France, my leadership experience in both the private and non-profit sectors, and my deep commitment to Harvard’s mission, positions me well to contribute effectively as an Elected Director.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? My main focus will be on three priorities. First, I will contribute to the HAA’s role in defending Harvard’s institutional autonomy, its commitment to free speech, and its pursuit of research excellence. Second, I will serve as an ambassador for these values within the alumni community, particularly among international alumni who may not always be fully aware of the complexity of these issues. Third, I will work to bring the voices of alumni from all backgrounds and perspectives to the attention of Harvard and the HAA, ensuring that a broad range of viewpoints is heard and considered.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? I see five major risks for Harvard over the next five years. First, the challenge of sustaining its chosen course in actively defending its institutional autonomy. Second, the risk of distraction from its core mission of educational and research excellence due to ongoing external pressures and confrontations. Third, the potential for a deepening rift within the University, among alumni, and between the University and its alumni, as broader societal polarization continues to intensify. Fourth, the risk of erosion of public trust in higher education, which could affect Harvard’s legitimacy and its ability to lead. Fifth, financial pressure and funding volatility, including uncertainty around federal research funding and broader constraints on resources.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? Alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education can be confident that I will consistently and thoughtfully defend it against efforts to restrict it. I am committed to doing so in a way that upholds open dialogue, respects diverse perspectives, and reinforces Harvard’s core values. Throughout, I will ensure that alumni perspectives continue to inform this effort in a constructive and meaningful way.

Return to candidate list

Nisha Kumar Behringer

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Yes, deeply and unequivocally. Our academic and institutional integrity is paramount. We must fiercely insist on and protect Harvard’s rights and independence on all these fronts. Universities both incubate knowledge and ensure its preservation—work that cannot flourish if the government dictates who can be admitted, who can be hired and what can be taught or discussed. I remain steadfast in my commitment to President Garber’s statement: “ Today, we stand for the values that have made American higher education a beacon for the world. We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion. That is how we achieve academic excellence, safeguard open inquiry and freedom of speech, and conduct pioneering research—and how we advance the boundless exploration that propels our nation and its people into a better future.”

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? Absolutely. These are red lines for me. I will advocate consistently and constructively for these principles.

We must also continue to communicate—publicly and through our alumni networks—the value our international community brings to our school and then to the world.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? Even though the University faces immense pressure from the government, this is a time to do what is right rather than what is expedient. History will judge us by our steadfast commitment to these core principles. Harvard should continue to engage across multiple fronts—legal, policy, Washington D.C., public dialogue, and alumni engagement—to uphold its values.

Organizations like Crimson Courage demonstrate how coordinated alumni voices can play a powerful, constructive role in this effort—amplifying the importance of academic freedom in a thoughtful, nonpartisan way.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard has a responsibility to lead with clarity and purpose. The government unquestionably believes that making an example of Harvard will force other institutions into submission. This only reinforces the need for Harvard to stand, without equivocation, for academic freedom. This is not just about Harvard; it is about preserving the role of higher education in a free and open society.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Harvard should use all available resources to ensure its affiliates—students, faculty, staff, Securitas security officers and especially HUPD are well versed on the legal limits on ICE agents. Harvard should also provide affiliates with scenario-based training that provides practical and safe education for how to deal with ICE encounters. Harvard should also inform ICE of these steps to clearly signal that rogue behavior will not be tolerated and that proper processes must be adhered to strictly.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Yes. I am a woman and a minority. I care deeply about a campus that has representation from all backgrounds and points of view, and that feels inclusive. It makes us undoubtedly stronger. I have spent my entire professional and volunteer career promoting and ensuring diversity and inclusion in every setting, both formal and unstructured. This includes hiring, training and coaching diverse candidates throughout their careers and organizing numerous networking, leadership development and community building events. At Harvard, fostering a culture of curiosity, care, and mutual respect is essential to who we are and what we aspire to be.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I will work to ensure these tenets are upheld throughout Harvard, as they play out or get tested in policies and practices, either existing or proposed. I have been a supporter of Crimson Courage and will continue to do so and work with it. I will work to address these issues for our most marginalized communities and work across the University and alumni base to do so.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard should continue to promote the importance and impact of its research on advancing ideas and practical solutions that advance the country and world in thought and action. Public opinion is critical on this issue. While Harvard made the case for the importance of its research to the media in the early months of the litigation, these efforts have lessened recently. Now is the time to redouble our media campaign—alumni should be our best ambassadors for these messages, and especially coordinated efforts such as Crimson Courage, for this critical mission. Our work has made society freer and smarter and has benefitted humanity in so many ways, literally saving lives. Additionally, while it works to restore federal funding, Harvard needs to move with greater speed to source alternative funds while ensuring its academic independence, such as private-public partnerships.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? I am skeptical that a deal will be honored by the government. As Brown and Columbia have seen, signing on the dotted line does not mean the end of government interference. What we must do is make Harvard and the defense of higher education a non-partisan cause.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Absolutely not.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni are one of Harvard’s greatest strengths. We can and should continue to explain and vocalize our position and why academic freedom and institutional autonomy are not just words, but foundational values that drive not just the University’s mission but society’s progress. We cannot attract the best resources or deliver the magnitude and scope of our impact without it. We have an articulate and high-impact alumni base, and we need to use all of our platforms to spread the word about what tangible actions are being taken on campus in the realm of free speech and civic dialogue as well as diversifying funding sources, and engage in dialogues at all levels, including with our elected representatives, to pressure the federal government to relent from this overreach and restore funding. Crimson Courage is an exemplar of how our alumni base can mobilize.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I remain very honored and humbled to be asked to run. Harvard transformed my life, and I have tried to give back to the University in every way I can. This is a critical moment for Harvard, and I hope to bring my extensive leadership, execution and consensus and connection-building experience from both the corporate and non-profit arenas to the Overseer role, which entails directing the Visitation process for our schools and departments, a review and assessment process and advising University leadership on key priorities and initiatives and resource allocation. I am a strategic thinker and doer and am accustomed to finding and evaluating many perspectives in service of a goal. As a graduate of two schools, I am also eager to find ways for our University to collaborate more. I have been an active alumni for many decades and am happy to represent and liaise with our worldwide base.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? The key role of the Overseer is directing the Visitation process for our schools and departments, a review and assessment process on key priorities and initiatives and resource allocation. Ensuring academic freedom and adequate funding for our schools and departments is a top priority. Overseers must also ensure that University leadership continues to evolve the institution with new offerings to a global student body; this also means that schools and departments must ensure international students have all necessary resources to come to Harvard and thrive here. At the same time, the tenure track process needs to be reformed to attract the best talent in a world where academia and corporations are competing for the same talent.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Harvard has an incredible legacy and stature of excellence that it must sustain. As I described in Harvard Magazine, as the University works through the federal government’s demands, it must ensure that academic freedom and institutional integrity and independence are upheld, and that intellectual vitality and viewpoint variety flourish. As Alan Garber stated, “No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private unviersities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.” We need to ensure our funding sources are intact and able to support our mission for the near-term and long-term. Harvard needs to reclaim its standing as a model community and setting for open, civil, and collaborative debate, where dissenting, respectful dialogues push our thinking and work to greater heights. It must also evidence the value and appeal of higher education to a broader audience. Artificial intelligence presents new learning and research modalities and methods, which require updated classroom norms and lab practices. At the same time, in a time of increasing financial constraints, Harvard must also continue to be Harvard, attracting the world’s top talent, cultivating our next generation of leaders and delivering groundbreaking research. These are also significant opportunities. Solving these is very consequential for Harvard, its global leadership position and universities everywhere; if we get these right, the world will follow.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? As I mentioned, I think this moment extends beyond our Yard with global ramifications.

I also believe that our alumni community has the reach and power to significantly impact the nation and the world’s views and actions on academic freedom and higher education. I am very dedicated to defending these tenets--it is the heart and soul of Harvard's existence.

Return to candidate list

June Nagao

Office sought: Elected Director

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Unreservedly, yes. Harvard’s ability to pursue excellence, attract the world’s best scholars and students, and produce top-tier research that benefits humanity depends entirely on this independence. This is the foundational premise of what a research university is for, not the partisan football it has unfortunately become. It’s not that government institutions can’t produce excellence; what they cannot do is determine their own intellectual agenda freely, hire and tenure faculty based purely on scholarly merit without political exposure, and create the kind of open, self-correcting intellectual culture that makes a university different from a government lab. They produce a different kind of excellence, one that is necessarily more directed and less generative of the unpredictable, disruptive inquiry that universities uniquely enable. Harvard’s value is specifically in that untethered intellectual freedom.

I hold this view not least because I see its implications from outside the United States: Harvard’s global standing - its ability to draw students and scholars from every corner of the world - depends on that independence being credible and visible. When it is in question, prospective students and faculty elsewhere weigh it in their decisions. Harvard’s excellence and its independence are not separable.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? The constitutional right of free speech is what distinguishes American higher education from most other systems in the world: the legally protected right to inquire, dissent, and challenge received wisdom without fear of reprisal. I fully support this right, and I believe Harvard’s willingness to defend it visibly and without equivocation is inseparable from its identity as a great university.

To be clear, the role of an ED is as alumni association representative, not executive, policy-maker, or legal decision-maker - we do not sit in the room where operational or legal responses to federal pressure are decided. I would not pretend the ED role carries authority it does not have, but where I can advocate, I will.

I would use my voice within the HAA Board to make clear that the alumni community, including the international alumni community, stands firmly behind Harvard’s commitment to free inquiry and free expression. I would advocate for the HAA to keep alumni informed of the University's continuing efforts to defend its independence. And I would work to ensure that international alumni, who represent Harvard’s global reach and are watching this moment closely, are heard as a constituency that cares deeply about what Harvard stands for.

I have heard that cuts to federal research funding are causing reductions in graduate student enrollment, particularly at the PhD level. Research is the foundation of a great university. If the pipeline of doctoral researchers shrinks, Harvard’s long-term intellectual vitality is at stake, along with its ability to remain a destination for the world's most promising international scholars. I would urge Harvard and its alumni to find ways to protect and where possible restore those positions as the University navigates this difficult funding environment.

More broadly, Harvard should continue to communicate clearly and proactively to international students, faculty, and their families that it is fighting for them through direct outreach and visible institutional commitment.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? A few thoughts, speaking both as a long time Harvard volunteer and as someone who has watched this situation from Tokyo:

First, Harvard should be transparent with its community about what it is facing and how it is responding. When people don’t know what is happening, they fill the vacuum with fear. Harvard has an opportunity to model courageous, clear-eyed leadership.

Second, Harvard should continue to build and reinforce coalitions with peer institutions. No university can withstand sustained federal pressure in isolation. Harvard standing with MIT, Yale, and others sends an important signal about the breadth of institutional commitment to these values.

Third, and this is where I can contribute directly: Harvard should ensure its international alumni community is engaged as a resource rather than just an audience. We can bring Harvard's case to universities, board rooms and policy circles across Asia, Europe, and beyond where Harvard's reputation and the health of academic freedom are matters of genuine concern.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard occupies a unique position. Its size, endowment, global profile, and legal resources make it one of the few institutions capable of absorbing the cost of standing firm. With that comes a natural responsibility to use its position not just for itself, but in ways that support institutions that cannot afford to fight alone, whether by sharing legal resources, using its convening power, or simply being visible in its commitment to institutional independence. The Law School, Kennedy School, and other faculties are extraordinary resources for thinking through these challenges. Those faculties are well positioned to inform University strategy on these questions.

Beyond the legal and institutional dimensions, Harvard can advocate for the principle that academic freedom is essential to a functioning democracy. That is a message that resonates well beyond Cambridge.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? Every member of Harvard's community deserves to learn, teach, and work with confidence that the institution stands behind them, and that any law enforcement action on campus follows proper legal process. I believe in the rule of law, and that means due process for everyone.

On the specific legal tools available to Harvard in this area, I would defer to the General Counsel and legal teams who are far better positioned to advise - this is a question with real legal complexity that deserves precise answers.

I was honored to receive the endorsement of the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard. I am a member of the Harvard Asian American Alumni Alliance, a supporter of Harvard Alumni for Women’s Global Empowerment, and have spent over 15 years as an active HAA volunteer working to connect Harvard's international community to Cambridge and the broader Harvard community. Growing up between cultures and working across borders throughout my career has given me a firsthand appreciation for what inclusion makes possible.

I am aware that DEI has become politically charged in ways that complicate nuanced conversation. What matters to me is the underlying commitment: that all students, faculty, and staff at Harvard, regardless of background, have a real opportunity to thrive and belong.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? I will advocate consistently within the HAA Board for Harvard to hold firm on its core commitments, especially when there is pressure to compromise them. I will also work to ensure that the voices of international alumni, and of alumni from underrepresented communities, are present and heard in HAA deliberations. Beyond the Board, I hope to connect Harvard's efforts in this space with the broader international alumni community, whose reach and networks represent a resource for amplifying Harvard's position globally.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? Harvard can respond on several fronts: where restrictions are legally contestable, Harvard has both the standing and the resources to pursue that, and has already demonstrated its willingness to do so. On the funding side, deepening relationships with international partners, philanthropic foundations, and industry collaborators who share Harvard's commitment to open inquiry would help diversify and stabilize the research funding base over time.

Over the long term, funding pressures can gradually reshape research priorities; the question of what gets studied, and what doesn't, matters as much as the funding levels themselves. Harvard's greatest strength is the freedom of its scholars to pursue questions wherever they lead. Protecting that culture is as important as protecting any individual funding stream.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Only if any such arrangement is fully consistent with Harvard's academic mission and does not compromise its independence or its obligations to its community. Funding restored at the cost of institutional integrity would ultimately cost far more than it gains - in faculty trust, student confidence, and the international reputation that makes Harvard what it is.

I am not opposed to dialogue with any administration. But any agreement would need to be one Harvard can stand behind publicly and defend to its community.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Only if there is legally established validity for such a fine. Paying a fine without legal basis would set a dangerous precedent, effectively acknowledging liability that does not exist and potentially inviting further demands. Harvard's legal team should be the guide here, not expediency.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni have an important role to play here. As individuals rather than an institution, we can speak freely, engage our own networks, and bring Harvard's case to a wide range of audiences.

Practically, that means several things: providing financial support to help sustain Harvard; using our platforms in business, media, policy, and civic life to make the case for why institutional independence matters for higher education broadly; and encouraging Harvard's leadership to hold firm on its core commitments even when they carry a cost.

International alumni can extend that work further, bringing Harvard's perspective into audiences around the world where the health of academic freedom is a matter of direct concern.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I am running because international alumni bring something distinct to the HAA Board: an understanding of what Harvard means to its global community. Harvard's community extends across six continents, and that breadth deserves to be represented in its alumni leadership.

I have been an active Harvard volunteer for over 15 years. I have served as HAA Director for Asia, sit on the board of the Harvard Club of Japan, and am a member of the Harvard Club of Boston, Harvard Club of New York, the Harvard Asian American Alumni Alliance, the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard, and Harvard Alumni for Climate and Environment. That work has been focused consistently on connecting Harvard's international alumni community to Cambridge and to each other.

Professionally, I work in impact investing with a focus on environmental sustainability, which has shaped my thinking on long-term institutional resilience and the relationship between funding, independence, and mission.

What I hope to bring is a perspective that complements what others on the Board offer: that of someone based in Tokyo, engaged across Asia and internationally, who has spent years connecting Harvard's global community and Cambridge. I believe that kind of on-the-ground perspective can benefit HAA.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? My primary focus will be deepening the connection between Harvard's international alumni and the University, ensuring that community feels engaged, represented, and heard. Their voices and networks are among Harvard's most valuable global assets.

I will also focus on the issues that sit at the intersection of my experience and Harvard's current challenges. And where I can use my voice within the Board to advocate for Harvard's commitment to free expression and institutional independence, I will.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? Three risks stand out to me:

First, the pace of AI's transformation of education is outrunning governance capacity across higher education. Questions about what it means to learn, to research, and to credential in an era of rapidly evolving AI tools are among the most consequential a research university will face. Harvard has an opportunity to shape how that transition unfolds, for itself and for higher education broadly.

Second, a narrowing of Harvard's global orientation at precisely the moment when that reach matters most. Harvard's excellence is inseparable from its ability to attract the world's best students and scholars and to engage with systemic, wide-reaching challenges. A drift toward a more inward focus would be a significant strategic and intellectual loss.

Third, the erosion of institutional resolve. The danger is not sudden failure but incremental accommodation - small adjustments in research priorities, in what questions get pursued, in whose voices are amplified - that cumulatively reshape Harvard's character.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? My candidacy is grounded in over 15 years of HAA volunteer work - building relationships, showing up, and making the case for Harvard's relevance to alumni who may feel far from Cambridge. Part of what drives me is the joy of that connective work: sharing the latest research, initiatives, and thinking coming out of Cambridge, and helping alumni feel connected to governance and life at the University.

The international alumni community spans six continents and has a real stake in what Harvard stands for. That includes a deep and abiding stake in academic freedom - Harvard's willingness to defend its independence resonates across every country where its alumni live and work. I would be honored to carry that perspective into the HAA Board.

If you share that conviction, I would be grateful for your support.

Return to candidate list

Nadine Harris

Office sought: Overseer

Do you support Harvard's independence to determine who is hired to teach, who is admitted to learn, and what is taught at Harvard? Absolutely. Academic independence is essential not only for intellectual rigor, but for society’s ability to generate knowledge, challenge assumptions, and solve complex problems.

Will you use your role to oppose Harvard agreeing to any federal dictates that undermine the rights of students, faculty and staff to free speech? As an Overseer, my role would be first to listen and then to lead with an approach grounded in Harvard’s mission and values, not external pressure.

Are there other specific actions you want Harvard to take (or not take) in defense of academic freedom, civil liberties and institutional autonomy? I believe Harvard must both maintain clear institutional policies to protect free inquiry and civil liberties, and also invest in the capacity-building to make such policies effective in a real-world context.

What role should Harvard play in defense of higher education nationally? Harvard University is a standard-bearer for academic excellence. I believe that we can and should demonstrate how universities can uphold academic freedom, intellectual rigor and open discourse in a polarized environment.

What should Harvard do to keep ICE off campus and protect student, faculty and staff from unlawful conduct by ICE? I believe that the university has an important role to play in promoting an academic environment that is safe and free of intimidation within the bounds of legal compliance. This includes protecting rights and due process for students, faculty, and staff as well as providing clear protocols and legal resources so that individuals understand their rights and know where to go when they have concerns.

Are you committed to ensuring Harvard provides a welcoming and inclusive campus including investment in fostering diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as a culture of curiosity, care and respect? Why or why not? Absolutely. A welcoming and inclusive campus is fundamental to academic excellence. Diverse perspectives strengthen inquiry, improve outcomes, and better prepare students to lead in a complex world. Inclusion and rigor are not in tension—they are mutually reinforcing.

What will you do to support Harvard's preservation of academic freedom, civil liberties and constitutional and human rights through its policies and practices, especially for the most marginalized constituencies in our community? My career in health care and public health has been dedicated to ensuring that high quality health care, and good health, is accessible to all, not just the most advantaged. Through my role as CA Surgeon General, I had a front row seat to understanding how our systems and policies shape our outcomes and I had the opportunity to implement evidence-based, equitable policies at scale. In the role of Overseer, I believe that would involve encouraging evidence-based decision-making, ensuring policies are applied fairly and consistently, supporting access to resources, and maintaining a culture of respect, dignity, and belonging.

How should Harvard to respond to, and manage, federal cuts to research funding, and federal restrictions on funding that are tied to ideology? I believe that Harvard should continue to advocate for robust, nonpartisan research funding, diversify funding sources where possible, and protect the integrity of research from ideological influence.

Should Harvard make a "deal" with the Trump administration to restore some or all of the federal funding that has been cut? Decisions like this require careful deliberation. As an Overseer, I would prioritize protecting Harvard’s academic integrity and independence, while ensuring the university can continue its critical educational and research mission. These decisions are best made collectively, with full information.

Should Harvard agree to pay a fine as part of a deal? Similarly, this would require careful review of the specific circumstances. My guiding principle would be to ensure that any action taken preserves Harvard’s mission, values, and long-term integrity.

What role can and should alumni play in helping Harvard support academic freedom and institutional autonomy? Alumni can be both ambassadors of the university in the broader society and also stewards of the institution’s values. I believe that alumni have the opportunity to serve as advocates for academic freedom and integrity and also supporters of the university’s mission through engagement and philanthropy.

Why are you running for your position, and why are you uniquely qualified for it? I am running because I believe this is a pivotal moment for higher education. My career has been dedicated to bridging science, policy, and practice to solve complex challenges. I hope to bring that same approach—grounded in evidence, collaboration, and systems thinking—to support Harvard’s mission.

What will be your main focus as a leader if you are elected? If elected, my main focus will be to support and reaffirm our institutional values. This includes championing a diverse and inclusive academic environment and strengthening Harvard’s role as a leader in evidence-based scholarship and academic independence.

What do you see as the biggest risks to Harvard over the next 5 years? I'm deeply concerned about the erosion of academic freedom, the retrenchment in diversity, equity and inclusion and the economic future of the university in light of the current challenges to our core values.

Is there anything else that you think alumni concerned about academic freedom at Harvard and across higher education should know about your candidacy? I believe deeply in the role universities play—not only in advancing knowledge, but in shaping how we engage with one another across difference. At this moment, considered, values-based leadership is essential, and I would be honored to contribute.

Return to candidate list