Dozens of faculty names removed from open letter amid concerns of retaliation, potential defamation lawsuit from Francine LeFrak
Updated: Oct 2
The removal of over 90 names from the letter followed multiple email requests from administrators, with one signatory reportedly asked to apologize to the trustee.
Photo by Gabriela Valentin/The Barnard Bulletin
September 22, 2026 at 11:24 a.m.
Updated September 22, 2026, at 2:04 p.m.
More than 90 faculty signatures were removed from an open letter that called on Barnard College to “acknowledge and investigate” Francine LeFrak’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein.
The letter was published after a Bulletin investigation into the Epstein files, which found that an intermediary contacted Jeffrey Epstein on LeFrak’s behalf. LeFrak stated that she did not know Epstein and found his actions “despicable, reprehensible, and against every principle I have ever fought for.”
In interviews with The Bulletin, all under the condition of anonymity due to concerns of legal and administrative retaliation, faculty members expressed dissatisfaction with the trustee’s statement, which was only featured in two articles from WIRED and POLITICO, rather than the Francine A. LeFrak Foundation’s website. The organization did not respond to The Bulletin’s requests for comment during the development of this article.
"Barnard has never taken a single dollar from Jeffrey Epstein and has zero direct connection to him," a Barnard spokesperson wrote in a statement to The Bulletin.
Some faculty who spoke with The Bulletin expressed dissatisfaction with the review conducted by Barnard’s independent counsel in late February, which concluded that no current College affiliate mentioned in the Epstein files “engaged in wrongdoing.” Faculty also noted that only a summary of the review was released to the public, rather than the complete investigation.
A College spokesperson stated that Barnard President Laura Rosenbury addressed questions about the review from faculty members at a board meeting held days after the investigation's findings were publicly released.
According to faculty who spoke with The Bulletin, an email was sent to senior faculty members from Rebecca Walkowitz, Provost and Dean of the Faculty, in late May. In her email, Walkowitz expressed concern that the open letter was making demands before “due process.” Faculty members told The Bulletin that they believed there was no such issue because the letter’s demands were based on publicly available documents.
Recipients of the email realized that Walkowitz’s message was sent days before a meeting in which the trustees would provide final approval of a signatory’s tenure case. After being notified of the email by its recipients — and concerned that LeFrak, a Barnard trustee, would intervene with the completion of their tenure process — the faculty member's name was anonymized on the letter.
Shortly afterward, Walkowitz sent a similar email to another faculty member who had been promoted to a leadership position at Barnard, with their appointment pending final approval from the trustees.
Every faculty member interviewed by The Bulletin stated that administrators asked the signatory to meet with and personally apologize to LeFrak for signing the open letter.
After the signatory was anonymized on the letter, faculty members told The Bulletin that a Zoom meeting took place involving the signatory, LeFrak, Walkowitz, and President Rosenbury. All interviewees stated that the signatory did not apologize to LeFrak during the meeting.
On July 13, the provost sent an email to the remaining 34 identified signatories to ask the group to consider taking down the letter, which was making it difficult for her “to effect greater collaboration between the faculty and members of the Board.”
By attributing their names to the letter, Walkowitz continued, “some readers of the letter feel strongly that … faculty members are making accusations (and thus encouraging students to make accusations) that are not supported by evidence.”
Last spring, students held protests outside of campus and in the LeFrak Center, demanding that the College take action against the trustee’s “longstanding affiliations with Epstein,” according to demonstrators.
Walkowitz wrote that “subsequent reviews and statements strongly refute those connections.”
“If we want to advance new conversations between the faculty and the Board — I would like to be able to do that — it would be helpful to remove the letter which has become an ongoing concern,” she concluded.
In a statement to The Bulletin, a Barnard spokesperson clarified that Walkowitz sent the email at the request of other faculty members. According to the spokesperson, after the College's independent review was released, several signatories told the provost that they wanted their names removed from the letter, raising concerns with administrators about its continuing online presence and acceptance of new signatures.
Walkowitz allowed faculty members to discuss among each other. In the email exchange reviewed by The Bulletin, recipients expressed anxiety about the email, as they perceived it as an implication that LeFrak was planning to sue signatories of the open letter.
One faculty member stated that they and other signatories contacted lawyers to educate themselves about the possibility of a defamation case. Some signatories suggested that the letter be taken down to avoid potential legal action, while others asked the provost follow-up questions.
In her reply sent a day later, Walkowitz wrote that the letter was “very much accessible, and I promise it is being read” through online news publications, including The Bulletin’s article.
One professor inquired about the findings of Barnard’s legal investigation and its accessibility. Walkowitz reiterated that the College was “confident” that the independent legal review “found no evidence that any current representative of Barnard College, including trustee and donor Francine A. LeFrak, had any communication or relationship with [Epstein] or engaged in any wrongdoing.”
Another faculty member asked if the College’s independent legal investigation could be shared among faculty or made publicly available. Walkowitz responded that there “wasn’t a formal report or summary,” and results of the investigation were only provided “orally by the general counsel” and “stated publicly.”
Walkowitz responded to the exchange three days later, on July 17, to clarify that the open letter’s demands for the removal of LeFrak’s name on campus buildings and her resignation from the Board of Trustees “is causing the most concern.”
The provost expressed that she felt that “removing the letter from public display would be ideal,” but acknowledged that faculty did not want its complete removal. She suggested deleting specific parts of the letter against LeFrak “so that it does not appear that you are still demanding her removal" and "given that there is no evidence tying LeFrak to Epstein directly."
“I don’t want faculty to be accused of unfairness for an opinion or a position that they no longer hold, or that they no longer hold strongly,” she added.
Walkowitz was unable to provide an interview or statement during the development of this article.
Following the email exchange and growing concerns of legal retaliation from LeFrak, over 90 faculty names were replaced with a statement noting that the letter was “co-written by several Barnard faculty members.”
Barnard’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors denounced “the multiple attempts” to “pressure faculty signatories” into removing the letter, which a spokesperson characterized as a “dangerous chilling of speech.”
In an interview with The Bulletin, a faculty member who consulted lawyers specializing in employment and defamation was told that a lawsuit from LeFrak would not hold up in court due to the First Amendment, New York State Law, and facts of the case. Another faculty member who spoke with The Bulletin was told the same by attorneys they consulted, given the anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation laws “designed to protect speakers from the threat of going to court to defend their First Amendment right to free speech.”
A Barnard spokesperson denied that LeFrak ever considered — or is still considering — to sue signatories, and characterized these statements as "false."
