Cornell Faculty Vote No Confidence in University Leadership After Controversial Response to Alleged Fraternity Gang Rape

Cornell University is facing growing pressure from its own academic community after faculty members voted to declare no confidence in the administration’s handling of sexual assault cases on campus. The decision follows months of criticism surrounding a former student’s allegation that she was drugged and sexually assaulted by multiple members of a university fraternity in 2024. The vote marks a significant moment of internal opposition to university leadership, raising difficult questions about student safety, accountability and how institutions respond when survivors come forward.

On November 6, Cornell’s Faculty Senate approved the no-confidence resolution by a vote of 75 to 50, with five members abstaining. The resolution specifically stated that the Senate had no confidence in the central administration’s ability to effectively address what it described as an ongoing crisis of sexual assault at the university. Although the vote sends a strong message of dissatisfaction, it is largely symbolic. Faculty senators do not have the authority to remove university leaders, and the decision does not automatically force President Michael Kotlikoff to resign.

The controversy stems from a lawsuit filed in September by a former student identified as Jane Doe. She alleges that seven former members of the Chi Phi fraternity sexually assaulted her at a fraternity house in October 2024 after she was given ketamine. The lawsuit also accuses Cornell of mishandling her complaints and failing to adequately protect her. The seven men named in the case have denied the allegations, with some maintaining that the encounter was consensual or that they were not involved. The university’s criminal investigation initially stalled after the local district attorney declined to pursue charges, but the matter has since been reopened and transferred to the New York Attorney General’s Office.

Cornell conducted its own Title IX investigation and imposed disciplinary measures against several of the men. Two were expelled, two received suspensions or probation, and others faced lesser sanctions, including reflection papers and bystander training. Another former student who had graduated was barred from campus. However, many faculty members argued that these measures did not adequately address the broader concerns about campus culture or the university’s response to reports of sexual misconduct. Some also criticized Kotlikoff for not responding publicly and forcefully enough when the allegations first emerged.

The university’s Board of Trustees acknowledged the anger and frustration across campus but reaffirmed its support for Kotlikoff and his administration. Board Chair Anne Smalling pointed to additional staff in the Office of Civil Rights, expanded sexual assault prevention education and more victim advocates as steps being taken to improve student safety and support survivors. Kotlikoff has also defended his leadership, saying the university needs time to make meaningful changes and that decisions about campus fraternities should be based on evidence and careful review.

Cornell has commissioned an independent investigation led by former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates to examine how the university handled the former student’s case and its broader procedures for responding to sexual assault reports. The findings could influence what happens next as students, faculty and alumni continue demanding greater transparency and accountability. For now, the no-confidence vote has exposed a deep divide between faculty members and university leadership, while the underlying allegations and questions about Cornell’s response remain unresolved.