Alan Dershowitz Defended Epstein and Trump. Here's Why Harvard Must Revoke His Status

What message is the Law School sending to young students?

Harvard Law School professors and alumni are no strangers to controversy – whether fighting for justice or working to undermine it. Part of the Law School’s commitment to diversity of thought and rigorous debate includes supporting faculty under fire for challenging the status quo or defending controversial clientele. However, Harvard University also has a professional and ethical responsibility to its community – past, present, and future – to associate only with those whose conduct reflects the highest standards of the legal profession. It is past time for the Law School to re‑evaluate Alan Dershowitz’s status as professor emeritus.

Although Dershowitz retired from teaching in 2013, he continues to publicly trade on his Harvard affiliation on a daily basis. In 2021, he used his emeritus position to nominate Jared Kushner and Avi Berkowitz for the Nobel Peace Prize, leveraging the Harvard name in a deeply political act. Today, as the Epstein scandal rages on, he regularly appears on Fox News and other right‑wing platforms, touting his Harvard credential while defending lawless figures like Donald Trump, denying Epstein’s pedophilia, and offering legal interpretations widely rejected by mainstream scholars. His public persona is now defined less by legal scholarship than by partisan punditry – and by scandal.

While embarrassingly poor legal takes don’t warrant discipline from the University, Dershowitz remains deeply entangled in the fallout of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. As Epstein’s lawyer, he helped negotiate the secret 2008 plea deal later ruled illegal by a federal judge for violating the rights of Epstein’s victims. Dershowitz has also faced a direct accusation from Virginia Giuffre, who alleged he engaged in sex acts with her while she was a minor trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Dershowitz denies this allegation, though he has admitted to receiving a massage at Epstein’s home and that he “kept [his] underwear on.” He has called his accuser an “admitted prostitute and a serial liar” and victim‑blamed her, saying she “made her own decisions in life.” Though, like Trump, he denies a lasting personal relationship with Epstein, he also reportedly sent a birthday letter to Epstein.

As a student at Harvard Law School, I was taught the Rules of Professional Conduct by which every attorney must abide. From his dubious lawyering to his lobbing personal insults at victims, Dershowitz’s actions likely violate at least one of those rules. In fact, in 2022, his promotion of debunked election lies resulted in complaints to the Massachusetts Bar. Harvard University cannot deny the impact this behavior has on young law students studying professional ethics as they watch Dershowitz exploit Harvard Law School’s name as cover for his bad acts.

The Law School’s website describes Dershowitz as “the best‑known criminal lawyer in the world” and “a distinguished defender of individual rights.” Nowhere does it acknowledge the deeply troubling allegations and public controversies that define his post‑teaching career. Harvard’s silence is not neutrality – it is complicity. By allowing Dershowitz to continue using the Harvard brand, the University is tacitly signaling that credible allegations of sexual abuse, unethical lawyering, and the defense of anti‑democratic actors are not disqualifying. That silence does not go unnoticed by students, alumni, or survivors of sexual violence.

This is not about “cancel culture.” This is about institutional accountability. Harvard has demonstrated it understands the symbolic power of its name. In suing the Trump administration over its decision to freeze more than $2 billion in federal research funding the University asserts its own commitment to moral and academic leadership. If Harvard is prepared to cite its institutional power and impact to protect itself and stand up to the Trump administration, the school cannot then deny the institutional validation it lends to a figure like Dershowitz.

The contradiction is stark when compared to how the University handled other controversies. The University has consistently revoked emeritus status for scandal-plagued faculty, including for Jorge Dominguez in 2019 and Gary Urton in 2021. In 2024, embattled professor John Camaroff retired without being granted emeritus status. In 2019, Harvard declined to renew the Faculty Dean appointment of Ronald Sullivan, who briefly represented Harvey Weinstein. Sullivan was never accused of any personal misconduct, yet was removed amid controversy over his client. In contrast, Dershowitz – who is not only a longtime associate of Epstein but also an individual previously accused of abusing a minor himself – has never been publicly scrutinized or investigated by the University.

The distinction is indefensible. It is far less consequential to revoke an honorary emeritus title from a retired professor than it is to remove a sitting dean. Yet Harvard has done the latter and refused even to address the former. The message this sends to students – particularly survivors of sexual misconduct – is devastating: proximity to power, media, and political influence shields certain people from accountability, even as others are swiftly dismissed.

Dershowitz himself has cast the accusations and public criticism as partisan attacks – an attempt to silence a vocal Trump defender and Fox News analyst. As it has shown recently, however, Harvard’s duty is not to respond to political pressure, but to stand up for truth, consistent with its own “Veritas” motto. That mission cannot coexist with the institutional endorsement of someone who stands beside Epstein, defends Trump’s attacks on democratic norms, and publicly dismisses a survivor with belittling language.

Emeritus status is not a neutral designation. It is a mark of honor and lasting affiliation. Continuing to offer that honor to Dershowitz undermines the University’s credibility – and sends the message that survivors are not believed, that lawyering without integrity carries no consequence, and that ethical lapses are tolerable as long as one is loud enough to be on TV.

Harvard University must act. If the University is to retain its reputation as a leader in legal education and ethical discourse, it must acknowledge that Dershowitz’s conduct, regardless of legal outcomes, has crossed every line of institutional responsibility. Removing him from the ranks of emeritus faculty would be an act of courage – and one long overdue.