Content warning: This article contains mention of sexual harassment. 

On Sunday, April 19, the Student Union passed Senate Resolution No. 4, which called on the University administration “to rescind the offer of an honorary degree to the 2026 commencement speaker, Sheryl Sandberg.” River Simard ‘26, the Class of 2026 Senator, authored and introduced the resolution and received sponsorships from Luke Farberman ’27, Senator-at-Large and Davvian Pagan ’29, Myra Kraft Achievers Program Senator. 

“I decided to write this [resolution] after speaking with several other seniors who were very upset about the decision that was made by the administration to appoint Sheryl Sandberg [as commencement speaker],” Simard shared in an April 24 interview with The Justice. “I felt it was important to take action as a representative of the student body and … see if this was something that the other senators wanted to make a statement on,” he continued. 

The resolution highlighted three distinct reasons for the Student Union’s call to remove Sandberg as speaker. First, “in March 2025, Sandberg was accused of sexual misconduct, which included Sandberg asking an employee to ‘join Sandberg in sharing a bed on a private jet’” and “‘instruct[ing] a different employee to purchase $13,000 worth of lingerie for Sandberg and the employee.’” Secondly, the resolution recognized that “in January 2025, Sandberg was sanctioned by a judge for ‘deleting emails related to litigation over Facebook's Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal, despite being told to preserve the messages.’” Finally, the resolution states that “a 2022 Amnesty International report found that Facebook’s algorithm (under Sandberg’s leadership) was promoting hate speech and substantially contributed to the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar in 2017.” Referencing a recent Letter to the Editor from Laura Limonic ’97, an op-ed by Nora Herndon-Lazerwith ’26 and a petition signed by students and faculty, the resolution cited demonstrated concerns about Sandberg from members of the Brandeis community. 

“I wouldn't have authored the resolution if I didn't have the same exact concerns that my classmates had, and as I've presented in the language of the resolution, there is overwhelming evidence that Sandberg should not be our commencement speaker,” Simard explained. Farberman, who signed the petition, affirmed his belief in an April 24 interview with The Justice that “choosing Sheryl Sandberg was unrepresentative of the ideals of both Brandeis … [and] the class of 2026.” 

Simard also discussed his intentionality with the resolution’s language. He shared that he aimed to “[characterize] Sandberg in a very truthful but specific way. And this isn’t a conversation about politics, it is a conversation about ethical concerns.” The resolution, which represents the Student Union and the student body’s opinion, focuses on objective issues with Sandberg’s character and leadership. 

Commencement for this academic year will happen on May 17, which is less than three weeks away. Simard is hopeful that the administration will take the Student Union’s resolution seriously, but recognizes that the short window might cause some logistical issues. “At the very least, if they’re not willing to remove Sandberg as a commencement speaker … I’m hopeful that the University is at least willing to recognize the flaws in Sandberg.” He continued, “the last thing I would want to see beyond no action being taken is complete silence from the University.” 

Farberman is more optimistic that the administration may take action to address student concerns, but he also sees the resolution as a way to show students “that the Student Union is trying to be responsive to what people on campus are saying and be representative of that.” 

Before a resolution is passed in the Union Senate, it usually must first pass through the Internal Operations Committee, followed by the Chief Judicial Officer from the Executive Board, who confirms that the resolution follows the bylaws. Typically, a resolution cannot be voted on in the same meeting that it’s introduced, but due to the urgency of the issue, it was passed within the same meeting. Even though the resolution was expedited, “it was dealt with properly … [and went] through the proper channels and everything. I think the outcome probably would have been the same” if the resolution had been voted on at the following meeting, Farberman said. 

“I can say that when I had discussed it with other members of the Student Union or other people who had spoken to me about the concerns with Sandberg, I never encountered any level of resistance. It seemed to be an issue that those who[m] I had spoken with had universally agreed on,” Simard said. He clarified that he does believe that there are students who are indifferent or excited about her arrival, but “I do think it was notable …  that the people I talked to have all been in agreement about a piece of legislation like this.” 

When asked whether he believed that the Student Union should be more involved in the administration’s choice of a commencement speaker, Farberman said “that without [the Student Union’s] input, it kind of takes away from the legitimacy of that representation by … a commencement speaker.” 

Simard was less confident that student input would work out logistically: “Theoretically … yes, I would love to see the student body selecting their own commencement speaker. But in reality, that’s not the norm at most universities. And beyond selecting someone, you also have to ensure that the speaker is going to be willing to come here.” He added, “there’s no reason that … Bad Bunny or Obama wouldn’t be the commencement speaker every single year based on just [student vote]. With that being said, I do think that the University should be receptive to the concerns of the student body.” 

Farberman believes that the Student Union “does … get its time of day,” but also that there is sometimes a disconnect between the administration and the Student Union. 

Simard emphasized that “beyond everything happening with Sandberg, it is important to recognize that the class of 2026 has worked very, very hard to be here.” He added, “the last thing I would want to see is Sandberg [take] all that recognition away from the class of 2026.”