Faculty at Cornell University have begun voting on whether they have confidence in the school's leadership, following public outcry over an alleged gang rape and questions about how the university handled the case.
The vote started on Thursday and is expected to run until November 6. It is non-binding, but it could signal that president Michael Kotlikoff has lost the confidence of the faculty.
Paul Ortiz, the lead faculty sponsor of the resolution, said many people had come forward to the sponsors. "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.
The case centers on a lawsuit filed last month. It alleges that a female student, identified as Jane Doe, was drugged and gang raped by seven male students at a fraternity house in 2024.
Critics have asked whether the university acted with enough urgency, or whether it downplayed the alleged abuse to protect its reputation. The university initially shut down the fraternity and suspended the male students. Two of them were later expelled.
On Wednesday, faculty debated whether to postpone the no-confidence vote. Some urged patience, while others argued the vote was a necessary answer to institutional reluctance to take the issue seriously. The Associated Press reported that the debate followed a letter to trustees in which a group of 20 female science and engineering faculty members called on Kotlikoff to resign. "What our community needed was clear leadership; instead, it faced a leadership vacuum," the letter stated.
Earlier this month, Kotlikoff addressed the fallout in a statement that listed 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.
Separately, two of the men accused of taking part in the alleged rape have asked for New York Attorney General Letitia James to be removed from her role overseeing the renewed criminal probe into the case. They cite social media posts in which James expressed support for the accuser before her appointment. A judge on Thursday appeared sceptical of one of the challenges, which James' office has said are "without merit".
