That makes the story an education-governance test, not a scandal rerun. The committee's release said Raskin is examining how Epstein used university relationships to burnish his reputation and, in the committee Democrats' account, to further his crimes and lure victims. The Guardian reported that Harvard and Bard have until 1 July to provide information.
The House release said Raskin asked Harvard president Alan Garber for extensive records, including communications with Epstein, donation documentation, information connected to admissions processes and previous investigative findings. The same release said he asked Bard board chair James Cox Chambers to make outgoing president Leon Botstein available for a transcribed interview and to provide records on Epstein donations, communications, admissions interactions, institutional decision-making and WilmerHale's review of Botstein's relationship with Epstein.
Table: What Raskin is asking each institution to explain
| Institution | Records or testimony sought | Prior institutional review | Current institutional response reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harvard University | Communications with Epstein, donation records, admissions-related material and prior investigative findings | Harvard's 2020 report said Epstein gave $9.1mn between 1998 and 2008 and that no gifts were received after his 2008 conviction | The Guardian reported Harvard did not immediately respond to a request for comment |
| Bard College | A transcribed interview with Leon Botstein plus records on donations, communications, admissions interactions, institutional decisions and WilmerHale's investigation | Bard said WilmerHale reviewed communications between Botstein and Epstein; Inside Higher Ed reported the review found Botstein minimized and was not fully accurate about the relationship | Bard told the Guardian it had received the letter and was reviewing it |
Source: House Judiciary Committee Democrats, Guardian, Harvard and Bard statements, 2026.
Harvard's own public account is now part of the dispute. In 2020, then-president Lawrence Bacow released a report saying Harvard received $9.1mn from Epstein between 1998 and 2008, mostly before his 2006 arrest, and that Harvard did not receive gifts from him after his 2008 conviction. The report also said Harvard had decided not to accept future gifts from Epstein after senior officials were briefed on the allegations against him.
Raskin's new letter challenges whether that account was complete enough. The House release said Harvard's prior internal investigations may have omitted key facts about Epstein's continued involvement with the university after 2008, including faculty relationships, campus access and admissions-related interactions. The Guardian reported that Raskin described Harvard's earlier investigations from 2008 and 2019 as incomplete or misleading and sought a fuller accounting.
The distinction matters because donor governance is not only a question of whether a cheque was accepted. It is also about access: offices, introductions, recommendations, campus status and the legitimacy that comes from proximity to respected academics. Harvard's 2020 report already acknowledged institutional and individual shortcomings. Raskin's demand asks whether the university's own review captured the full shape of Epstein's influence after the formal donation door was said to be closed.