Penn leadership upheaval could have a ‘chilling effect’ on college presidencies and university operations nationally

When he was angry about the response to accusations of antisemitism on campus, private equity giant Marc Rowan called on University of Pennsylvania donors to close their checkbooks until its president and board chair resigned.

And now they have, leaving some higher education experts and faculty worried about the potential impact of the high-profile resignation of president Liz Magill Saturday in the face of not only deep-pocketed donor backlash but also bipartisan political pressure, including a no-holds-barred grilling by members of Congress last week.

» READ MORE: Penn President Liz Magill resigns after facing intense controversy; chair of school’s board of trustees also steps down

“College presidents have never felt less sure-footed than they do today,” said Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, a Washington-based higher-education advocacy group. “And part of that is because no matter what they say or what they do, there is an avalanche of criticism from another direction.”

Never has that been more apparent than in the wake of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military response in Gaza, with presidents hesitant to issue statements, then doing so, then clarifying and apologizing — with criticism still ensuing from those supporting Israel, those supporting Palestinians, those claiming antisemitism, and those claiming Islamophobia.

Magill had the added controversy of the Palestine Writes Literary Festival, which was held on campus in late September and featured some speakers that critics faulted for having a history of making antisemitic remarks.

“She became a pawn in a much larger political battle that was unwinnable,” said Sophia Rosenfeld, professor of history at Penn and chair of the department. “She was damned if she did, and damned if she didn’t on almost all fronts. What is most worrisome is what her forced resignation spells for the future not just of Penn, but of higher education in the United States. This is a struggle over the future of universities.”

» READ MORE: Penn's donor backlash raises questions about how much influence philanthropists should have

Whether or not Magill made mistakes, that’s not what led to her downfall, she said.

“It’s about how she got caught up in essentially a hostile takeover of the university by outside forces who took advantage of a tragic situation in the world,” she said. “Penn cannot remain a great university if wealthy donors and board members can determine who’s hired or fired, what can be said on campus or in the classroom, and which students are permitted to remain or face expulsion.”

Rowan, a Wharton graduate and CEO of Apollo Global Management in New York who gave Wharton its largest single gift, $50 million, in 2018, called on Magill and board chair Scott L. Bok to resign after the festival was held. Other alumni including Dick Wolf, producer of the Law & Order franchise, and Ronald S. Lauder, of the Estée Lauder cosmetic company, joined in.

Lauder told Magill in advance of the festival that he wanted it canceled. After, he wrote to her in a letter he “had two people taking photos and two more who listened to the speakers” at the festival and found them to be “both antisemitic and viscerally anti-Israel.” And he said he didn’t want any students at Penn’s Lauder Institute of Management and International Studies, which he and his brother founded, to be taught by faculty who participated in the festival.

» READ MORE: Penn plans to review policies and training following controversy over Palestine Writes festival

Earlier last week, Ross Stevens, founder and CEO of Stone Ridge Asset Management, sent a letter to the university, attempting to withdraw a $100 million stock gift, as reported by Axios.

Presidents, who have the major responsibility of fundraising, may think twice before saying anything that could offend a donor with the capacity to give big gifts, and that could filter down to faculty, said James H. Finkelstein, professor emeritus of public policy at George Mason University.

“Beyond the turmoil president Magill’s resignation creates at Penn, it is likely to be a Waterloo moment for university presidents across the country, making them even more beholden to donors,” he said. “Presidents face the challenges of donor influence every day, but never on the scale of this and in such a public way. What happened at Penn can now happen anywhere and with any issue.”

Risa Lieberwitz, professor of labor and employment law at Cornell University and general counsel for the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), said Magill’s resignation is an example of the effect of undue influence by both donors and politicians who are seeking to have control over what happens on campus and in classrooms.

That, she said, can have a “chilling effect that can occur on general discussions within universities about issues that are controversial or maybe difficult to discuss. And that’s part of academic freedom to be able to have those discussions.

“And there may be a chilling effect on curriculum, the actual teaching in the classroom, [and] on public speech by faculty and by students who may fear the repercussions of pressures by external donors or politicians.”

She said AAUP is watching what is unfolding at Penn closely, as is its local chapter there.

“The ability of donors, lobbying groups, and members of Congress to destabilize the University of Pennsylvania reveals the need to restore a strong faculty voice in the governance of the institution,” AAUP-Penn said in a statement Saturday night.

The toppling of a president at one of the nation’s most prestigious private universities, where Magill’s less-than-18-month tenure stands as the shortest in the school’s history, also could impact future presidential searches at other schools. One national higher education expert said he talked to a headhunter currently leading a search who said he was going to have to take some time off because “nobody is going to want to be a college president.”

Susan VanGilder, of Storbeck Search/Diversified Search Group, which conducts searches for academic leaders, said “how could it not” when asked if she thought Magill’s departure would impact the desire to lead a college.

“People are going to think twice and very hard about what this can mean for their own personal careers and the impact that they can make on an institution if the political winds are shifting so quickly,” she said. “When you look at the work a president has to do, it’s not short term. It’s not one event. It’s not moments that are easily prepared for. On the other hand, it can end a presidency in a minute.”

Going forward, she said she anticipates that university presidential candidates will look even more critically at whether their leadership style is a fit with the college’s board of trustees.

At first Penn resisted the donors’ calls for Magill’s resignation, backing her after she made an impassioned speech at the trustees meeting in early November. But after the congressional committee hearing last week, where Magill was asked if calling for the genocide of Jewish people would be a violation of the school’s code of conduct and said it was “context-dependent,” there were bipartisan calls for her departure.

» READ MORE: Petitioners nationwide asked Penn to defend those who speak in support of Palestinians

Mitchell of the American Council on Education said universities do have to be prepared to talk about what constitutes appropriate debate and what veers into intolerance and threats even though there are not “bright, bright lines” delineating that.

“We all need to be more comfortable talking about those boundaries,” he said. “Where presidents can strongly state their own moral positions independent of legal niceties, that helps keep them above the partisan fray.”

That all may take more preparation. While Magill, a former Stanford Law School dean and University of Virginia provost with a stellar career record, looked like the ideal candidate on paper, presidents, especially new ones, are often not ready for the public spotlight, especially on a national stage, said George Mason’s Finkelstein.

“When the perfect storm arrives, as it did at Penn, their survival is likely to be based as much on luck as skill,” he said. “Magill’s luck ran out.”