At a congressional listening to on Tuesday, the leaders of Harvard, the College of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Know-how gave fastidiously worded — and seemingly evasive — solutions to the query of whether or not they would self-discipline college students who referred to as for the genocide of Jews. The extraordinary criticism that adopted led many to marvel: Who had ready them for testimony?

It seems that one among America’s greatest recognized white-shoe legislation corporations, WilmerHale, was intricately concerned.

Two of the college presidents, Claudine Homosexual of Harvard and Elizabeth Magill of Penn, ready individually for the congressional testimony with groups from WilmerHale, in keeping with two folks acquainted with the state of affairs who requested to not be recognized as a result of the preparation course of is confidential.

WilmerHale additionally had a gathering with M.I.T.’s president, Sally Kornbluth, one of many folks mentioned.

On Saturday, Ms. Magill resigned as Penn’s president after the fallout from her congressional testimony turned overwhelming.

WilmerHale, created by a merger in 2004 between Wilmer Cutler Pickering of Washington and Hale and Dorr of Boston, has places of work throughout the US, Europe and Asia. It’s best recognized within the authorized business for defending shoppers dealing with authorities investigations and enforcement. Amongst its best-known shoppers have been the oil big BP PLC, which the legislation agency represented throughout authorities investigations after an oil spill within the Gulf of Mexico, and President Richard Nixon, whom it represented in his battle with Congress over the Watergate tapes.

It additionally has an in depth follow working with universities.

Attorneys for WilmerHale sat within the entrance row on the listening to on Tuesday. They included Alyssa DaCunha, who leads the agency’s congressional investigations and disaster administration practices, and Felicia Ellsworth, the vice chair of the agency’s litigation and controversy division.

Each Ms. DaCunha and Ms. Ellsworth have been concerned in making ready the presidents of Harvard and Penn for the hearings, one individual acquainted with the method mentioned. The colleges every independently employed WilmerHale, and the agency created separate groups to arrange every president. The agency already had ties with all three faculties.

A spokeswoman for the agency declined to remark.

Making ready for congressional testimony includes mixing authorized warning with political savvy and customary sense, authorized consultants say. Attorneys sometimes advise these testifying to be aware of the legislation however to additionally think about headlines that might come out of the listening to. That may be a tough activity after hours of pointed questioning.

“I acquired caught up in what had grow to be at that time, an prolonged, combative trade about insurance policies and procedures,” Dr. Homosexual informed The Harvard Crimson.

Steven Davidoff Solomon, a professor on the College of California, Berkeley, College of Legislation, mentioned that the school presidents gave the impression to be “ready to provide solutions within the court docket — and never a public discussion board.”

However the accountability of college presidents, Mr. Solomon mentioned, is “to not give authorized solutions, it’s to provide the imaginative and prescient of the college.”

In one of the charged moments of testimony, Consultant Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, requested the three presidents whether or not requires violence towards Jews would violate their college’s code of conduct.

Dr. Kornbluth of M.I.T. responded that they may, “if focused at people, not making public statements.” Ms. Magill of Penn mentioned a name for violence towards Jews may very well be thought of a violation “whether it is directed and extreme, pervasive, it’s harassment.” When pushed to reply sure or no, she responded, “it’s a context-dependent determination.” And Dr. Homosexual of Harvard responded, “It may be, relying on the context.”

The responses instantly set off a flurry of criticism. A Home committee opened an investigation into the three establishments, and a donor clawed again a big donation to Penn. A day after Wharton’s board of advisers referred to as for Ms. Magill’s resignation, Wharton’s undergraduate government board issued an announcement on Friday in help of the change in management.

Critics mentioned the solutions gave the impression to be too centered on whether or not conduct would violate the First Modification.

“As soon as they have been in that field, I believe they caught with their preparation,” mentioned Edward Rock, a professor of legislation at New York College. “That’s why they got here throughout so wood. After which, afterward, they realized it was a horrible reply.”

Dr. Homosexual of Harvard issued a clarification on Wednesday: “Let me be clear: Requires violence or genocide towards the Jewish group, or any non secular or ethnic group, are vile. They haven’t any place at Harvard, and people who threaten our Jewish college students might be held to account.”

Ms. Magill of Penn mentioned in a video, “I used to be not centered on, however I ought to have been, the irrefutable reality {that a} name for genocide of Jewish folks is a name for a number of the most horrible violence human beings can perpetrate.”