Cornell University is facing mounting criticism from its faculty over the administration’s handling of a sexual assault case that has drawn significant campus and public attention. On Monday, the university’s faculty senate announced plans to vote on a resolution expressing no confidence in the school’s leadership, notably President Michael Kotlikoff and other top officials. While the planned vote would be largely symbolic and not lead to any immediate administrative changes, it signals deep dissatisfaction among faculty members with how the institution has addressed issues surrounding sexual violence.

The controversy centers on a lawsuit filed by a former student, identified as Jane Doe, who alleges she was drugged and sexually assaulted by seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity at a house party in October 2024. Following the allegations, the Tompkins County district attorney reviewed a complaint but decided not to pursue criminal charges. The accused men have denied the allegations. Last week, New York Governor Kathy Hochul named Attorney General Letitia James as special prosecutor, granting her authority to conduct an independent criminal investigation into the matter.

In response to the growing unrest on campus, university officials held a virtual meeting on Tuesday with faculty and staff to discuss their actions and policies related to sexual assault. President Kotlikoff described the incident as “horrific” and emphasized the university’s commitment to changing campus culture. However, several participants in the meeting expressed frustration with what they described as a defensive tone and a rigid format that limited open discussion. Some faculty members questioned the administration’s reluctance to revisit the role of fraternities and sororities, despite the president’s earlier acknowledgment of the need for a serious examination.

Several faculty senators noted that the conversation focused extensively on the existing Title IX investigative procedures, with the administration emphasizing that established systems functioned as intended. Critics, including Anne Marie Brady, a research director within the university’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, said the administration appeared unwilling to acknowledge its role in the crisis, leaving many issues unresolved. Faculty senator Iris Packman remarked that while the president labeled the assault “horrific,” he simultaneously suggested the university had not erred, a contradiction that undermined confidence in leadership.

The case has also stirred student activism. On Monday, thousands of students, joined by some faculty members, staged a protest on campus, calling out the administration, particularly Kotlikoff, for perceived failures in addressing sexual assault and ensuring campus safety. The protests reflected broader concerns about how the university balances accountability and community safety.

Following the faculty’s announcement of the no-confidence vote, university leaders are expected to continue engagement with various campus constituencies. Another administrative meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, including select alumni volunteers and leadership representatives. Provost Kavita Bala acknowledged ongoing challenges faced by faculty, including teaching students who are among the accused but remain enrolled, and committed to seeking solutions for these difficult circumstances.

While the no-confidence resolution will not remove current administrators, faculty members see it as a critical expression of disapproval and a call for more effective leadership in addressing the persistent crisis of sexual assault on campus.