Harvard could deny recognition—and exemption from the College’s sanctions—to student social groups whose graduate boards it determines exert too much sway over the organizations.
Two organizations spent a total of $90,000 in the first quarter of 2018 lobbying around legislation that could imperil the College’s ability to enforce its social group sanctions.
Asked whether he is concerned by the push to oppose the penalties, Khurana said he thinks “people should respect a private institution’s ability to organize itself around its mission.”
"I worry [the legislation] represents an effort by Congress to regulate student life and the shape and character of private institutions in a way that threatens to undermine that diversity of choice and experience," Faust wrote.
Harvard is considering requiring gender-neutral student social groups to disclose anonymized gender breakdowns to the College in order to avoid Harvard’s sanctions, per an email obtained by The Crimson.
The students are particularly lobbying around the PROSPER Act, a proposed update to the Higher Education Act that—if passed—could force Harvard to choose between millions of dollars in federal research funding and its social group penalties.
“It’s the type of thing that you allow for the possibility but you don’t plan for its being an eventuality,” said Richard T. Porteus Jr. ’78, the graduate president of the Fly Club.
The Committee on Student Life met Thursday morning to discuss the College’s long-anticipated final implementation plan for its social group policy—and to begin to determine the committee’s role in evaluating that policy.
The final club alumni hope to re-work the language of the law so it endangers the College’s social group penalties.
The Office of Student Life could continue to tweak the recommendations even after staffers send the plan to students, Khurana said.