Harvard Professor Touts Former Gubernatorial Candidate

In the ever-expanding world of academia, where theory often collides with real-world consequence, a new Harvard seminar is sparking more than intellectual curiosity. Titled “Race, Gender, and the Law Through the Archive,” the course, taught by assistant history professor Dr. Myisha Eatmon, ventures deep into intersectionality and identity politics—but it’s one name in particular that’s drawing sharp attention: Stacey Abrams, referred to in the course description as a “political mastermind.”

It’s a bold characterization, especially given Abrams’ electoral record. Twice defeated in her bids for Georgia’s governorship, Abrams remains a polarizing figure in national politics—revered by progressives as a champion of voting rights, yet criticized even within her own party for strategic missteps and controversy surrounding her election claims. Nonetheless, Harvard’s course positions her alongside figures like Michelle Obama and Kamala Harris as foundational to modern Black political activism.

The course itself is a deep dive into how Black women and non-binary individuals have shaped political and legal systems “during Jim (Jane) Crow and beyond,” emphasizing “legal imagination” and the subjective experiences of marginalized identities. It’s a lens rooted in Critical Race Theory, where law is not fixed, but interpreted through the lived experience of oppression.

And Abrams fits that framework—at least academically. After her narrow 2018 loss to Brian Kemp, Abrams made headlines for refusing to concede in the traditional sense, claiming the election was “flawed” due to alleged voter suppression. While she stopped short of asserting outright fraud, the rhetoric was enough to launch years of political and legal activism—including lawsuits, voting initiatives, and the rise of her own nonprofit empire.

But that empire has not gone unscrutinized. Just as Harvard students are being asked to explore her political legacy, Georgia’s Ethics Commission has been digging into it. On Wednesday, two organizations founded by Abrams—the New Georgia Project and its Action Fund—were fined a combined $300,000 for illegally conducting electioneering activities without reporting contributions or expenditures. The fine is the largest in the commission’s history.

The infractions span several years and elections, including the 2018 gubernatorial race and a failed 2019 referendum campaign in Gwinnett County. One group, Gente4Abrams, was fined in 2020 for similarly failing to register and report over $900,000 in campaign support activity. Ethics Commissioner Rick Thompson called the secretive financial activity “shameful,” arguing that such violations should carry criminal, not just civil, consequences.

And despite Abrams stepping down from the New Georgia Project in 2017, filings show Sen. Raphael Warnock served as CEO of the organization during the period in question. While there’s no conclusive evidence tying Warnock to the violations, the ongoing investigation into potential coordination with Abrams’ campaign casts a long shadow.

So how does a figure with a blemished electoral track record and a trail of ethics violations earn the title “political mastermind” in an Ivy League classroom?

That’s the question critics are asking—and one that speaks to the widening chasm between academic theory and political reality. Abrams has certainly left a mark: her work around voter registration, especially among communities historically underrepresented at the polls, is undeniable. But admiration doesn’t erase outcomes.

Even among Democrats, enthusiasm for another Abrams campaign is waning. Georgia political strategist Fred Hicks put it bluntly: “There’s not a lot of energy… for a third Abrams run.” Her 2022 loss to Kemp was by a much wider margin, and while her national profile remains high, her political capital appears diminished—at least for now.

The post Harvard Professor Touts Former Gubernatorial Candidate appeared first on Patriot Newsfeed.