Dr. Claudine Gay holds the distinction of being both Harvard University’s first Black and shortest serving president. Her brief tenure was marred by controversy following her testimony on antisemitism before the House Education Committee. That testimony brought increased scrutiny by the right, leading to allegations of plagiarism in her academic publications. Her resignation will serve as a pivotal marker for detractors of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
Following the shortest presidential search in 70 years, Harvard’s board announced Dr. Gay as the successor to outgoing President Lawrence Bacow in December 2022. After five years as the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Gay assumed the office of president on July 1, 2023. Notably, questions about her quick appointment revolved around the insider nature of the university, and not that she was selected because of her race or gender.
However, the historical significance of Gay’s appointment as the first Black president was highlighted. Gay’s race and gender played a leading role in reactions and media coverage. A significance that was amplified as, on June 29, the Supreme Court of the U.S. found that Harvard University and the University of North Carolina’s race based admissions were unconstitutional.
In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote “many universities have for too long… concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin… Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
In a quote given to The Harvard Crimson, Gay stated “The Supreme Court’s decision on college and university admissions will change how we pursue the educational benefits of diversity… But our commitment to that work remains steadfast, is essential to who we are, and the mission that we are here to advance.”
It seemed inevitable that race would be the central theme of Gay’s presidency. It was also the start of her demise.
In December 2023, Gay appeared in a hearing before the House Education Committee. When pressed to say that that calls for genocide against Jews violates the school’s rules on bullying and harassment, Gay avoided giving a clear answer. While her response was the legally correct answer, it was not the politically correct one that members of Congress wanted. The lack of a clear stance drew outage from the right.
Conservatives targeted Gay. They began looking for a weakness and found it in her academic writings. Investigations into her publications found a history of using similar or identical language as other authors, without giving the proper citations. The controversy and number of allegations continued to grow until Gay eventually resigned on January 2.
Reaction to Gay’s resignation is largely divided along political and ideological lines. To the left, she is an accomplished academic who overcame racism to become the leader of one of the most prestigious universities in the world, only to be taken down because of racist attacks. Gay even referenced that belief in her resignation letter, stating it was “frightening to be subjected to personal attacks and threats fueled by racial animus.”
To the right, Gay is a serial plagiarizer who was placed in a position, not because of her qualifications, but because of her race. The product of overzealous DEI efforts that prioritized ethnicity and gender over qualifications and integrity.
This division will play a key role in the future of DEI and its inclusion in environmental, social, and governance policies in both the public and private sectors. While ESG is primarily focused on environmental concerns, there is an ongoing controversy in the U.S. relating to DEI. Under the social category, companies include DEI initiatives in their ESG reports. While the most controversial initiatives relate to LGBTQ policies, DEI policies routinely include racial demographics and actions to change the racial makeup of the entity.
Following the SCOTUS opinion on college admissions, the legal footing for DEI efforts on race became unstable. There is a clear legal pathway to a successful legal challenge before the current SCOTUS that could result in DEI being found discriminatory. However, until that action is taken, the debate remains in the political arena, which is where Gay has fueled the critics.
Gay gave ESG and DEI detractors the villain they needed. Someone they could point to and justify their concerns. Big enough to matter, but small enough to fall. Her resignation confirmed their belief that she was only advanced to “check a box.” It is a belief that is catastrophic to the DEI movement and brings an unfair cloud of judgement on others who advance, not based on their race or gender, but because of their qualifications and skills.
2024 is going to be a pivotal and trying year for the future of DEI and ESG. Gay’s resignation will be a driving force in the conversation.