In the early stages of understanding the scope of the most horrifying criminal empire in American history, we are grappling with academia’s role in it. Several faculty members and institutions have been implicated. A few were genuinely innocent and ignored Epstein’s invitations, and some were willingly complicit in crimes against humanity. 

Epstein’s co-conspirators have fundamentally compromised the student-teacher relationship and the student-university relationship.

In this collection, we will consider how academic policies, environments, funding structures, and toxic subcultures were vulnerable to Epstein’s manipulation. Epstein was a narcissist who collected academics like trophies because they lent credibility to his "philanthropy." He used the reputation of esteemed institutions to make himself sound trustworthy. Every academic who thought they were benefitting from a "friendship" was used as a stepping stone, an anecdote at cocktail parties, and a way to boost his own ego. 

Epstein threw in just enough pseudo-intellectual buzzwords (and funding) that these academics convinced themselves that he was legitimate. He slowly tested the waters of their morality, pushing boundaries of inappropriateness to see what he could get away with, and pursuing relationships with those who never said no to him. 

The actions of those complicit with Epstein have shattered the lives of their victims. The survivors and the families of victims are owed not just reparations, but the knowledge that 1) they have been heard, 2) their tormentors are being held accountable, and 3) the rest of us are working to make sure that this never happens again. 

We are seeking submissions that consider:

• How Epstein won over academics and gained entry into academic spaces

• How the same policies that reinforced Epstein’s ability to navigate academic spaces are also used to further marginalize vulnerable communities

• Parallels in universities’ failure to address on-campus sexual assault and sexual harassment

• Institutionalized hypocrisy in spaces that claim to have conquered white cis-het male hegemony

• How performative progressivism without actual institutional changes hurts minority students

• FERPA violations and Title IX violations committed by Epstein enablers/ accomplices 

• The extent to which the inadequate support for the #MeToo movement enabled Epstein’s manipulation of institutions 

• The experiences of faculty members who refused to be bought by Epstein 

• The infrastructure of funding research at public and private universities and how this is vulnerable to corruption or manipulation  

• Psycholinguistic analyses of code-switching: how some of the academic email writers adjusted their language to mirror Epstein’s 

• Whistleblowing policies at universities 

• The explicit and implicit responsibilities of academia 

• Universities as sites of surveillance 

• The role of campus newspapers and student-run periodicals in exposing those named in the files

• The role of campus protests 

• The history of white supremacy in academic spaces

• The history of corruption within academic spaces 

• The psychology of narcissism

• Media narratives surrounding academics named in the files 

• Social media, digital culture, and feminist responses 

• The media response to the Clintons’ Feb. 2026 testimony 

• A chapter devoted to an individual academic, i.e. Duke’s Dan Ariely, Harvard’s Martin Nowak, Harvard’s Lisa Randall, Montana State’s Jack Horner, Princeton’s Corina Tarnita, Stanford’s Nathan Wolfe, SVA’s David Ross, UCLA’s Mark Tramo, USC’s Antonio Damasio, Yale’s David Gelernter, among others 

• Envisioning a post-Epstein academy: what changes must be made?

• Intersectional perspectives that employ theories of digital culture, education, gender studies, history, law, media studies, pedagogy, rhetoric 

We are seeking submissions from: 

• Faculty members, graduate students, instructors of all levels

• Campus administrators 

• Journalists and those with journalistic experience

• Holders of an M.Ed. or J.D. 

• Title IX coordinators 

• Anyone whose background equips them to contribute 

In your submission please include:

• Title

• Abstract (250-300 words)

• Author bio (75-100 words)

• Five keywords 

Please send submissions in the body of the email to academics.and.epstein@gmail.com

Important dates: 

Submissions due: Saturday, March 14, 2026, 6 p.m. ET

Notification of acceptance: Friday, March 20, 2026

Final lengths of chapters will be determined after a publisher has been secured. The proposal will be sent as soon as the list of contributors is confirmed.