Kamala Harris has recently faced accusations of plagiarism from conservative activist Christopher Rufo, who claimed that her 2009 book, Smart on Crime, contained sections lifted from publicly accessible sources like Wikipedia and news articles. Rufo identified five specific passages, totalling approximately 500 words, where content appeared to have been copied without appropriate citation.Harris, who co-wrote the book during her tenure as San Francisco’s district attorney, has refuted these allegations, dismissing them as politically motivated attacks designed to damage her position in the 2024 presidential race. While a review acknowledged similarities in some sections describing programmes and statistical information, these were regarded as minor citation issues rather than intentional plagiarism.
Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, shared his claims in an online post, citing the analysis of Austrian plagiarism researcher Stefan Weber. Rufo pointed to six paragraphs within the roughly 200-page book, co-written with Joan O’C. Hamilton, as evidence of uncited material. The book, published in 2009 before Harris became California’s attorney general, focused on policy rooted in her experience prosecuting serious crimes in San Francisco and Alameda County.
A CNN review of the passages indicated that Harris and Hamilton did fail to appropriately attribute some sections to their original sources. Experts remarked that plagiarism involves using someone else’s words or ideas without giving due credit, even if a source is cited, unless the text is sufficiently paraphrased or directly quoted. In response, Harris’s campaign dismissed the allegations as a politically driven attack. James Singer, a spokesperson for the campaign, stated that Smart on Crime had been published 15 years ago and included citations and statistics throughout in footnotes and endnotes.
Rufo has gained attention for opposing diversity, equity, and inclusion programmes, and has previously published plagiarism accusations that contributed to the resignation of Harvard University President Claudine Gay. Rufo belongs to a loose group of conservative writers and activists who have targeted academics, particularly Black scholars involved in diversity work, alleging plagiarism in their academic papers. His accusations against Harris suggest a shift towards scrutinising political figures.
In his interview, Rufo explained that he and his collaborators had examined the work of around 300 authors, primarily from left-wing backgrounds, to explore what he describes as the theory that “left-wing racialist ideology leads to academic corruption.” Although he admitted to not investigating former President Donald Trump’s or Senator JD Vance‘s work, he emphasised that the group’s focus is on the academic output of those promoting diversity and inclusion initiatives. Despite his group’s focus on left-leaning individuals, Rufo mentioned that they did not find evidence of plagiarism in the master’s thesis of Tim Walz, Harris’s running mate.
Rufo cited an example where Harris and Hamilton allegedly used text from a press release by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice without proper quotation marks, although they did include a citation in a footnote. Another instance involved the supposed copying of language from an NBC News article about a 2008 study on low graduation rates in city schools. Although the study was cited in the book, the NBC News article was not, adding weight to Rufo’s claims.
Harris’s campaign reiterated that sources were cited throughout the book, and Singer dismissed Rufo’s allegations as desperate attempts to undermine Harris’s growing bipartisan support. Despite these accusations, no issues have been raised regarding her later book, The Truths We Hold.
JD Vance, Republican senator and vice-presidential candidate, was quick to comment on the situation, mocking Harris on social media and suggesting that she had not written her own book. Vance also highlighted that he had personally authored his memoir, Hillbilly Elegy.
The incident has drawn comparisons to Joe Biden’s 1987 plagiarism scandal, which derailed his first presidential campaign after it was revealed that he had borrowed from speeches by Neil Kinnock, Robert Kennedy, and Hubert Humphrey without proper attribution. The controversy, coupled with academic dishonesty during his law school years, led to Biden withdrawing from the race. However, Harris’s case appears more limited in scope, with her team maintaining that citations were included where necessary.
Plagiarism accusations are not uncommon in political circles. Donald Trump faced similar allegations in 2020 when phrases from policy papers were said to have been used without citation. Although his campaign labelled these as citation oversights, the accusations illustrated how plagiarism claims can be wielded as a political tool during election campaigns.