Sabrina L. Schaeffer

Opinion contributor

Now that financial mogul Jeffrey Epstein is charged with sex trafficking girls — including minors as young as 14 years old — his relationship to Harvard University and Harvard's hypocrisy and failure to respond adequately to the Epstein scandal deserves our attention.

Epstein did not attend Harvard. Nor is he a faculty member. In fact, he doesn’t have a college degree. But for decades he has been a substantial supporter of Harvard’s programming, faculty, and social institutions. Prior to his 2008 plea deal in Florida, Epstein made sizeable grants to the university, including a $6.5 million donation in 2003 to the university's Program for Evolutionary Dynamics and additional pledges of up to $30 million. During this period, he supported several professors and he frequently described himself as a “Harvard investor.”

After Epstein was charged with soliciting sex in 2006, Harvard’s interim president made clear — as reported in The Harvard Crimson — that the university would not return his gift. He added that only in “extreme cases” would the university refuse contributions from questionable sources. But that prompts the question: Does Harvard not consider involvement in sex-trafficking girls to be an “extreme case?”

This time, in the wake of this newest indictment, Harvard spokesman Jonathan Swain said that the university “does not comment on individual gifts or their status.” Nor has the press office issued a statement.

Epstein’s philanthropy ran deep and included other universities like MIT, as well as the Council on Foreign Relations. But Harvard’s silence is especially troubling when we consider recent events at the university.

Harvard's Harvey Weinstein crackdown

This spring, Harvard’s leadership came down hard — and publicly — on Ronald Sullivan, a law professor at Harvard Law School who joined the defense team for Harvey Weinstein (not, as far as I can tell, a Harvard donor), the former film producer accused of years of sexual abuse and assault against women. Sullivan has taught and practiced the legal principle that, in America, everyone accused of a crime — no matter how awful — has the right to legal representation. And that includes Weinstein.

Harvard's giant misstep:Harvard ditched US values of due process and diverse opinion in Harvey Weinstein case

Students claimed Sullivan’s work providing legal counsel for Weinstein was “trauma inducing,” and the school caved. They did not renew Sullivan's — or his wife Stephanie Robinson’s — terms as deans of Winthrop House (one of the 12 undergraduate residential houses at Harvard College). This was a huge insult to the couple, but ultimately, just a small headache for the university, with no financial repercussions.

Harvard had an opportunity to grandstand about women’s rights and shake their #MeToo feathers with little downside. That seems to be the pattern at Harvard. When it comes to standing up for women’s rights, the university goes for the low-hanging fruit.

In the post-#MeToo era, everyone wants to display their support for women. Harvard conducted a Sexual Conduct Survey and departments have integrated #MeToo into their curriculum with references to the movement in course syllabi across disciplines from English to music to human evolutionary biology.

All of this may have a place in the conversation about gender-based violence and treatment of women — but it doesn’t ask much of the university. When it comes to walking the walk by passing up money, Harvard slinks away.

Silence should not be an option

The money that Epstein granted over the years, no doubt, has been spent. But Harvard has failed to condemn the donor, discuss how they have changed their development practices or plan to vet future donors. It may be asking too much for non-profits to scrutinize every donor who sends them money; but when the truth comes out, silence should not be an option.

Harvard’s endowment is more than $37 billion — that’s bigger than the Gross Domestic Products of roughly half the world’s countries. The university could have easily replaced the funding that Epstein provided. What’s more, they could give some of that endowment to organizations that are working to bring awareness to and stop sex trafficking.

Navigating the #MeToo era can be difficult. But it’s time corporate, political, and intellectual leaders start speaking up. Jeffrey Epstein hobnobbed with the rich and famous and insulated himself with intellectual power-houses who could be useful to him. Leaders like Harvard have a responsibility to put an end to it, and put their money where their mouth is.

Sabrina L. Schaeffer is a senior director at the White House Writers Group. She is on the board of RightNow, which helps promote Republican female leadership. Follow her on Twitter @SL_Schaeffer.