Archive

Harvard sued over push for fossil fuels divestment | TribLIVE.com
News

Harvard sued over push for fossil fuels divestment

The Associated Press

BOSTON — Seven Harvard University students have filed a lawsuit asking a judge to force the university’s governing body to divest from fossil fuel companies.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday alleges investment in those companies violates the university’s duties as a public charity. The complaint asks the court to compel the Harvard Corporation, the governing body, to stop investing any of its $36.4 billion endowment in gas, coal and oil companies.

Harvard students have pressed the university to divest from fossil fuels as a way to slow climate change.

“Climate change is now causing harm through mortality, economic damage and political instability,” said Benjamin Franta, one of the students who filed the lawsuit. “The Harvard Corporation has a moral and legal duty to avoid investing in activities that cause such grave harms to its students and the public.”

Spokesman Jeff Neal said university leaders agree that climate change must be confronted but “differ on the means” to do that. Neal says Harvard continues to focus on supporting research and teaching to create climate change solutions.

In a letter to the Harvard community in October 2013, Harvard President Drew Faust called climate change “one of the world’s most consequential challenges” but said she and her colleagues on the Harvard Corporation do not believe that divestment from the fossil fuel industry is warranted.

“The funds in our endowment have been given to us by generous benefactors over many years to advance academic aims, not to serve other purposes, however worthy,” Faust wrote.

“The endowment is a resource, not an instrument to impel social or political change,” she wrote.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.