For attorneys engaged in the burgeoning discipline of crisis management, recent House hearings focusing on antisemistim in American university campuses were difficult viewing.
Claudine Gay of Harvard University, Sally Kornbluth of MIT, and Liz Magill of the University of Pennsylvania—three university presidents—were thoroughly scrutinized over their organizations’ policies on antisemitic speech, while their legal advocates observed unable to intervene. The testimony of these presidents was roundly criticized, and WilmerHale, the influential law firm representing Gay and Magill, came under scrutiny for its preparation of these clients.
Two prominent attorneys who specialize in crisis management, when queried about the guidance they would have offered to these university presidents, offered their opinions. Reginald “Reg” Brown of Kirkland & Ellis stressed the importance of carefully reading the room and listening to the questions, and suggested the presidents’ responses could have been more human, rather than overly ‘lawyerly’.
Joshua Galper, co-founder of both the strategic communications firm Trident DMG and the Galper & Goldberg law firm, opined that the university presidents’ testimonies came across like legal proceedings rather than addressing the true goal – congressional theater.
Moreover, both Brown and Galper advocated for swift damage control post-hearing, and discouraged rushing to judgment about WilmerHale’s role, noting the difficulty of such high-tension testimonies and the fact that client responses are not always reflective of legal counsel’s advice.
Check out lawyer turned writer [David Lat‘s] comprehensive analysis at Bloomberg, as well as other exclusive jurisdiction pieces.