Small Protests at Ohio State Ignite National Debate on Donor Names and Epstein Ties
In recent months, a series of small but persistent protests has emerged at Ohio State University, centered on a straightforward demand: the removal of billionaire retail magnate Les Wexner's name from campus buildings. What started as a localized campaign has rapidly evolved into part of a broader national movement, as universities across the United States grapple with complex questions about donor legacies, institutional memory, and the extent to which they are willing to reassess past associations linked to Jeffrey Epstein.
A Local Protest with National Echoes
At Ohio State University, the Wexner name is prominently displayed across the campus, adorning key facilities such as the Wexner Medical Center, the football complex, and the Wexner Center for the Arts. For many nurses, students, and former athletes, this visibility has become increasingly problematic. Their concerns focus on Wexner's documented association with Epstein, his former financial adviser. While Wexner has not been charged with any crime related to Epstein and has stated he was misled, critics argue that this association raises serious questions about the continued public honor bestowed upon him.
Similar concerns are now resonating at other prestigious institutions. At Harvard University, students and faculty have called for the renaming of the Leslie H. Wexner Building and the Wexner-Sunshine Lobby at the Kennedy School, citing what they describe as strong ties between Wexner and Epstein. Beyond Wexner, other names have come under scrutiny, including buildings linked to figures such as Steve Tisch, Casey Wasserman, Glenn Dubin, and Howard Lutnick, all facing renewed attention due to their past associations with Epstein.
Growing Pressure on Academic Institutions
Pressure is mounting on campuses nationwide. At Haverford College, students recently voted to urge the administration to proceed with renaming the Allison and Howard Lutnick Library, with college president Wendy Raymond promising a response within the standard review period, as reported by AP. At Ohio State, requests to remove Wexner's name are undergoing an internal review process, with university president Ravi Bellamkonda emphasizing that the process will be "thorough, fair, and open."
Harvard has acknowledged receiving renaming requests but has not provided further comment. Meanwhile, other institutions are taking more limited steps. For instance, Tufts University clarified that its Tisch Library was named after Preston Tisch, not Steve Tisch, and removed Steve Tisch's handprints from a sports facility during renovations. Universities like the University of California Los Angeles and Stony Brook University continue to review concerns related to donor names.
Donations and Their Afterlives: A Broader Tension
This ongoing debate reflects a deeper tension in higher education, where naming rights are often tied to significant philanthropic contributions. Wexner and his family have donated over $200 million to Ohio State over the years, funding major projects such as the medical center, arts programs, and athletic facilities. Similarly, at Harvard's Kennedy School, the Wexner family has contributed tens of millions of dollars. These patterns are common across institutions, with donors—often alumni or long-time supporters—shaping infrastructure, research, and student support systems.
However, as new information emerges or public standards shift, universities face a critical question: should past donations continue to define present recognition? This issue is not unprecedented, recalling earlier controversies such as those involving the Purdue Pharma-linked Sackler family and the opioid crisis, where some institutions removed the Sackler name while others, including Harvard, chose not to, citing complex legacies.
A Moral and Financial Dilemma for Universities
Experts note that universities are now navigating competing responsibilities. Anne Bergeron, a museum consultant who studies naming ethics, told AP that institutions take donor standards seriously but must also account for changing public expectations, describing the situation as a "moment of reckoning" for universities. Students are often at the forefront of this shift, with Bergeron observing that younger generations show little tolerance for associations they perceive as inconsistent with institutional values.
Conversely, some argue that renaming raises its own concerns. In a letter reported by AP, a local resident questioned whether institutions should revisit past decisions while continuing to benefit from earlier donations, highlighting the financial and ethical complexities involved.
Survivors and the Meaning of Campus Spaces
For many students and alumni, this issue is deeply personal. A student at Harvard Kennedy School leading a renaming effort told AP that entering a building associated with Epstein-linked figures can be distressing, affecting how survivors experience campus spaces. At Ohio State, protesters have made similar arguments, suggesting that removing names could foster a more accountable environment. Others point to additional cases, such as calls to remove the name of a medical professional who received payments from Epstein in the past, though those involved have stated the payments were unrelated to any misconduct.
What Universities Do Next: A Cautious Approach
For now, most institutions are proceeding cautiously, with reviews often conducted internally and without fixed timelines. Decisions involve careful consideration of legal, financial, and reputational factors. The outcomes may vary from campus to campus—some names may remain, while others could be removed or recontextualized. What is clear is that this debate is no longer confined to one donor or one university; it represents a significant shift in how institutions interpret legacy, accountability, and public trust. The names on buildings, once symbols of gratitude, are now prompting profound questions about ethics and memory in higher education.
