Cornell Faculty Advance No-Confidence Vote After Fraternity Scandal

Cornell University faculty members will hold an electronic vote on a no-confidence resolution against the administration through November 6.

The ballot addresses the university’s response to a 2024 gang-rape allegation involving at least seven male students at a fraternity house. Faculty members discussed the leadership’s handling of the case at a closed-door meeting on Wednesday. The Associated Press obtained a recording of the session, which revealed a split between those urging patience and those demanding immediate action.

The vote is largely symbolic but could pressure the university trustees, who select the campus leadership. New York state prosecutors reopened the case last month after the victim filed a civil lawsuit. The woman, who was 20 at the time of the incident, said she was forced to leave Cornell following the event. All seven alleged attackers deny the claims.

University leaders faced backlash and mass protests after their internal inquiry resulted in only two expulsions. Other accused students received penalties including essays, workshops, or short suspensions. The victim recently wrote to the faculty senate, stating she felt "unsupported and disbelieved" by President Michael Kotlikoff. A New York state judge ruled this weekend that she may continue to use the pseudonym Jane Doe in the lawsuit for safety reasons.

Governor Kathy Hochul appointed Attorney General Letitia James as special counsel to investigate the case earlier this month. At Wednesday’s meeting, some faculty members shared personal experiences of harassment and cited fears of professional retaliation. Beth Frances Milles, a performing arts professor, asked for civility after receiving messages from women who had experienced sexual assault.

"I understand we have to take action," Milles said. "There are so many things to talk about. Please, let’s talk about it together and not sneer at each other when we disagree."

Members voted down an attempt to delay the resolution until an independent investigation was completed. Anne Marie Brady, a co-sponsor of the resolution and a contingent faculty member, said she was encouraged by the number of speakers despite the professional risks involved. "The more people who speak out, the more we protect each other," Brady said.

Ariana Kim, a music professor, described how past harassment affected her tenure case and how her previous reports to administrators, including then-provost Kotlikoff, went nowhere. She expressed relief at speaking publicly. Seth Sanders, an economics professor, noted that about 80% of his department opposed the resolution for now. He argued that faculty did not yet know enough to judge the administration’s response. "I don’t think setting it up as having confidence in the administration or supporting the administration is right," Sanders said. "I think it’s legitimate to think that you don’t know whether to have confidence because you don’t know what happened or why in the Jane Doe case."