University of Pennsylvania President, Liz Magill, Resigns: Latest Reports Confirm Surprising Decision

Multiple reports on Saturday have confirmed that Liz Magill, the President of the University of Pennsylvania, has made the decision to resign from her current position. According to The Daily Pennsylvanian, Magill expressed his gratitude for the opportunity to serve as President of the institution.

At approximately 4:30 p.m., a communication in the form of an email was distributed to the members of the Penn community.  According to the email, it is anticipated that Magill will continue to serve as a faculty member at Penn Carey Law. 

In a statement, Scott Bok, the Chair of the University Board of Trustees, expressed that they will be contacting the concerned parties in the upcoming days to provide updates on the arrangements for interim leadership at Penn. President Magill has made the decision to continue serving in their current position until the appointment of an interim president takes place.

After Magill's appearance before Congress, where he provided testimony regarding the issue of antisemitism on college campuses, he found himself confronted with numerous demands for his resignation. 

After successfully completing one task or objective, the user expresses their satisfaction with the progress made. On the social media platform X, Representative Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York, expressed her anticipation by stating, "Two to go." The current efforts to combat the widespread issue of antisemitism in esteemed higher education institutions across America are just in their initial stages.

On Tuesday, the House Education and Workforce Committee witnessed the testimonies of three esteemed university presidents: Sally Kornbluth from MIT, Claudine Gay from Harvard, and Liz Magill from Penn.

As a consequence of their testimonies, Penn experienced a significant impact on its financial support, with at least one major donor announcing their decision to temporarily withhold their financial contributions.


According to CNN, the criticism surrounding the testimony of the school presidents primarily revolves around their responses to inquiries from committee members. Specifically, the focus is on whether advocating for the genocide of Jews goes against the code of conduct on bullying or harassment at their respective institutions.

It was not explicitly stated by any of them that advocating for genocide would automatically be considered a violation of their code of conduct. The response provided by the individual indicated that the outcome would be contingent upon the specific circumstances and behavior involved. Furthermore, they sought to strike a balance between the issue at hand and the principles of free speech.


Get latest news delivered daily!

We will send you breaking news right to your inbox

© 2024 Wayne Dupree, Privacy Policy