Harvard students seek $53 billion in funding to break Israeli ties

Harvard Law School students voted to require the university’s $53 billion fund to be sought for “arms, surveillance technology” and other companies that were sold by Israeli-linked companies.

The Harvard administration last year said it would not sell and that the student vote would not be enforced, but the move brings anti-Israel protests back to the spotlight as President Alan Gerber tries to reassure Republicans who are receiving serious criticism of schools, including handling anti-Semitics.

This move will occur a few days after the administration We’ve taken $400 million from Columbia University Immigration officials have arrested organizers of the anti-Israel protest. Last week, Harvard said it would freeze faculty and staff, which have temporarily frozen amid concerns over federal funding.

“While the Trump administration’s threat is aimed at submission, this referendum shows that these efforts will only strengthen solidarity with Palestine,” said Eileen Amina, organizer of free Palestinian law students, in a statement. According to the memo, 73% of the 842 students who voted in chose to sell. The law school has around 2,000 students.

Palestinian students have long called on universities to cut ties with Israel, even after protests on campus escalated following the Hamas attack on the Jewish state and Israeli retaliation in October 2023.

Schools and lawmakers view them as anti-Semitic because they reject boycotts, sells, sanctions or BDS, reject moves against Israel, raise questions about the legitimacy of the Jewish state, and call the policies of a country to be single.

In a statement, Harvard Law School said it strongly supports students’ rights to free speech. He added that the administration did not play a role in the referendum conducted by the student government.

“As explained in the message to students, the administration expressed deep disappointment at the student government’s leadership decision to advance an unnecessary, divisive referendum that violates its purpose of “fostering communities” and “enhancing inclusion,” Harvard Law said.

This story was originally introduced Fortune.com