Cornell University faculty members have begun a no-confidence vote over the leadership’s handling of an alleged gang rape, in a challenge that could signal that President Michael Kotlikoff has lost the confidence of staff.
The non-binding vote began on Thursday and is expected to continue until 6 November. It follows public criticism of the university’s response to allegations involving a female student known as Jane Doe.
A lawsuit filed last month alleges that Jane Doe was drugged and raped by seven male students at a fraternity house in 2024. The university initially shut down the fraternity and suspended the students, two of whom were later expelled.
The case has prompted questions over whether Cornell acted urgently enough or sought to minimise the alleged abuse to protect its reputation.
Paul Ortiz, the lead faculty sponsor of the resolution, said hundreds of students, staff, academics and alumni had contacted those backing the motion.
“Hundreds of students, staff, faculty and alumni approached the sponsors of this resolution to emphasize to us that the Jane Doe case is but a tip of the iceberg,” he said.
Faculty members debated on Wednesday whether to delay the vote. Some called for patience, while others said it was needed because of what they described as institutional reluctance to take the issue seriously.
A group of 20 female science and engineering faculty members has also written to Cornell’s trustees calling for Mr Kotlikoff to resign. “What our community needed was clear leadership; instead, it faced a leadership vacuum,” the letter said.
Mr Kotlikoff addressed the fallout earlier this month, listing a number of preliminary responses. “I am deeply sorry for the harm Jane Doe suffered in 2024, and appalled that this act of sexual violence occurred within our Cornell community,” he said.
The dispute comes as two men accused of involvement in the alleged rape seek to remove New York Attorney General Letitia James from overseeing a renewed criminal investigation. They have cited social media posts in which Ms James expressed support for the accuser before taking up her role.
A judge appeared sceptical of one of the challenges on Thursday. Ms James’s office has described the applications as “without merit”.
