Overview
Following Epstein’s 2019 arrest and the subsequent public scrutiny of his academic philanthropy, universities and institutions faced intense pressure to return or redirect his donations. Responses varied significantly.
MIT
Action taken: Returned approximately ,000 in Epstein-linked donations. Media Lab director Joi Ito resigned after it was revealed he had personally fundraised from Epstein after the 2008 guilty plea. MIT’s president commissioned an independent review (the Goodwin Procter report), which found institutional failures in due diligence.
Harvard
Action taken: Returned approximately ,000 in direct personal donations from Epstein. However, Harvard retained approximately .1 million in research grants that flowed through the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics (PED), a department Epstein had helped establish. Harvard president Lawrence Bacow defended retaining the research grants, citing their deployment in ongoing research.
Cornell
Returned donations; reviewed financial ties.
NYU Law School
Under Dean Robert Zimmer, reviewed ties; returned directly attributed Epstein funds.
The Pattern: Access vs. Money
The Epstein case exposed a pattern in which institutions prioritized Epstein’s perceived connections and philanthropic network over conducting basic due diligenceeven after 2008, when his guilty plea was a matter of public record. The MIT Media Lab received .5 million through intermediaries designed to obscure Epstein as the source, a practice now recognized as a major governance failure.