Recently, millions of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein have been made public. These files not only reveal a network of sexual abuse and criminal organizations but also offer a crucial mirror to the fragile relationship between academia, power, and ethics. The documents show how finance, elite politics, and academia are intertwined, revealing where the ethical boundaries of universities are being pushed (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00388-0).
One of the most striking examples of Epstein’s connections to academia is his ties to Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). It has been documented that he donated millions of dollars to Harvard between 1998 and 2008, some of which were directed to university-wide units, such as the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics. Although the university has investigated the visible portion of these donations and stated that it has not accepted donations since 2008, the ethical implications of past decisions are still being debated (https://www.harvard.edu/president/news-and-statements-by-president-bacow/2020/report-regarding-jeffrey-epstein-s-connections-to-harvard/).
Reports from MIT show a similar picture: over the years, Epstein’s named and anonymous donations were accepted, some of which went to research areas such as the Media Lab, leading to the resignation of several academic leaders (https://news.mit.edu/2020/mit-releases-results-fact-finding-report-jeffrey-epstein-0110).
These examples demonstrate that academic institutions may encounter ethical vulnerabilities in their search for funding. While money is a constantly sought-after resource for a prestigious institution, the question of what to do when the source of that money conflicts with ethical principles is often an issue people prefer not to confront.
The Epstein files contain not only financial documents but also correspondence with academics, academic meetings, and personal connections. For example, documents show that some professors had extensive correspondence with Epstein and attended events together (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/2026/02/03/nine-more-higher-ed-names-epstein-files).
Can such connections be defended with claims of “academic freedom” and “academic independence”? Academic freedom means freedom of thought, bold research, and questioning power. However, the issue is whether academia can maintain its ethical responsibility. Academic freedom includes not only freedom of research and expression but also the responsibility to maintain a critical distance from power relations.
When figures like Epstein infiltrate academic institutions through money and connections, the following challenge arises: Can academia maintain its critical distance from money, or will it succumb to it?
This event reveals a deeper ethical blindness than simply asking “did academia make a mistake?”: a criminal infiltrating prestigious institutions with money and connections, the institutions’ inability to openly question this, and the consequences remaining unaddressed for a long time… It’s easy to say that a donation should be refused; the difficult part is establishing standards that enable the decision to refuse and maintaining those practices.
We shouldn’t view academic solidarity solely as a defense mechanism against external pressures. In ethical crises, the greatest responsibility always falls on the academic community within. Academia must constantly question its internal power relations, funding sources, and ethical priorities; it must strike a balance between money, prestige, and connections and ethical principles. Ethical crises often arise not from complicity in crime, but from ignoring it.
