Cornell Faculty Senate Votes No Confidence in Leadership Over Handling of Sexual Assault Allegations

On Friday afternoon, an email went out to the members of Cornell University's Faculty Senate with the result of a vote that had been weeks in the making: 75 in favor of a resolution declaring "no confidence" in the school's top leaders, 50 against, five abstaining and five not voting.

The resolution is symbolic. The Faculty Senate has no power over the university's president or administrators, and the measure did not call for President Michael Kotlikoff to resign. Its backers said they hoped it would press the board of trustees to confront what they described as longstanding institutional failures around sexual misconduct.

The vote grew out of a lawsuit filed in mid-September by a former student, identified in court papers as Jane Doe. She sued the university and seven former members of the Chi Phi fraternity, saying she was given ketamine and gang raped at the fraternity house in October 2024. All of the men have denied the allegations, saying either that the sex was consensual or that they were not involved. The local district attorney first concluded the woman had consented and that no crime had been committed. That investigation has since been reopened and handed to New York's attorney general.

Cornell had already taken disciplinary action after a monthslong Title IX investigation, according to records obtained by The New York Times. Two of the accused students were expelled, two were suspended and placed on probation, and two were required to write reflection papers and complete bystander training. A seventh man had already graduated and was barred from campus. Kotlikoff also convened a task force on sexual misconduct, which has released certain recommendations.

Some faculty said that was not enough. Critics faulted the president for not acting more forcefully to strengthen the disciplinary process, push for criminal investigations and change campus party culture. Paul Ortiz, a labor history professor who co-sponsored the resolution, said last week that hundreds of students, staff, alumni and faculty had approached its sponsors to say the Jane Doe case is "but a tip of the iceberg," and that "a veritable fortress of silence has been breached" around sexual violence since the resolution was introduced.

Kotlikoff addressed senators on the first day of debate. He pledged to make Cornell a leader on sexual assault and asked for more time. He argued that replacing him would do little to solve complex problems and could harm the university's reputation. He acknowledged that he had not read the campus police report, explaining that university policy bars top administrators from interfering in criminal investigations. He rejected suggestions that he had been indifferent to the woman's case, though he conceded he had only recently learned she had left Cornell. He said the university must determine whether fraternities can operate safely, left open the possibility of sweeping restrictions on Greek life, and said decisions should rest on research and evidence rather than emotion.

The board of trustees responded Friday that the vote reflected deep anger on campus and sent a "clear signal that what happened to Jane Doe is unacceptable." It nonetheless said Kotlikoff and his administration were the right leaders to address the issue "thoughtfully and comprehensively." Board chair Anne Smalling said the board fully supports the president, pointing to expanded prevention education, additional victim advocates and more staff in the Office of Civil Rights.

Thomas Giuffra, Jane Doe's attorney, said in a statement that he hoped the vote would be another step toward educating and supporting the Cornell community by addressing what he called the longstanding scourge of sexual assault on campus.

Some professors had urged colleagues to wait for an independent investigation by Sally Yates, the former U.S. Deputy Attorney General, whom Cornell hired to examine both its response to the woman's 2024 report and its broader procedures for handling similar complaints. That review, together with the attorney general's reopened criminal inquiry, is what to watch next.