As Cornell University continues to face scrutiny for the school's handling of a former student's allegations of gang rape in 2024, faculty at the school will meet for the second time on Wednesday to debate whether to issue a vote of no confidence in the administration.
The vote puts Cornell's president, Michael Kotlikoff, senior officials working with him and the 64-member board of trustees in a spotlight as some faculty say the university has mishandled the alleged sexual assault case of a former student, known as Jane Doe.
Tensions among some faculty have risen as they enter Wednesday's debate after Doe wrote in a letter addressed to the faculty senate that she felt "unsupported" and "disbelieved" by Kotlikoff after he met with a sorority president and discussed Doe's case. Officials at Cornell dispute Doe's characterization of the secondhand account.
"I can't speak for everyone and I haven't heard from everyone, but those I've heard from are very troubled by what's happening and they do want to see a change in leadership," said Ariana Kim, a professor of music who supports the resolution.
The resolution would be a largely symbolic measure to voice opposition to the "central administration," including both Kotlikoff and the board of trustees. But the measure, if passed, would offer a stunning and rarely-invoked rebuke of Kotlikoff.
"The president's career is on the line," said Richard Bensel, a professor of government. "We know Mike," Bensel said of Kotlikoff. "I mean, he was my neighbor. I like him. I do not like the way he administers his duties and responsibilities. I think he's made mistakes. I mean, serious mistakes."
Faculty will be able to vote on the matter from Oct. 29 until Nov. 6. To pass, the resolution requires a simple majority out of the faculty senate body's 131 voting-eligible members, according to Dean of Faculty Chris Schaffer.
The vote of no confidence has divided faculty. Some academic departments at Cornell have spent the past two weeks following the first meeting internally discussing the merits of the proposal. While there are about 20 people in the faculty senate who have signed on as cosponsors, others in the body have proposed other measures, including the creation of several task groups to investigate issues of campus sexual misconduct. Some are also pushing to shelve the no confidence vote indefinitely.
Kotlikoff told faculty members that he is committed to address Doe's case and issues of sexual misconduct on campus. Additionally, a person who is familiar with the board's thinking but did not want to speak publicly about the matter said the board of trustees seems less interested in replacing Kotlikoff and more invested in moving forward and addressing pervasive issues of sexual misconduct on campus.
For many faculty, Kotlikoff's handling of Jane Doe's case has prompted outrage from alumni and students, who are calling for changes to campus culture surrounding sexual assault prevention and Greek life culture.
Faculty are also coming to the meeting with increased scrutiny towards the board of trustees. Kim, who attended the board's open session on Oct. 15, said she was frustrated by the board's decision to not discuss Doe's case during its public meeting.
"To say that this is the elephant in the room is a massive understatement," Kim said. "This is a very important pivotal time at Cornell and there is massive support for an overhaul in leadership to be happening, and for them to not address that in a public setting is concerning."
'Unsupported and disbelieved'
On the same day as the first debate on the resolution earlier this month, Doe wrote in a letter to faculty that Kotlikoff's handling of her case has "diminished my confidence in the administration's ability to approach my experience with the understanding, sensitivity and fairness I had hoped for and expected from what had been my dream school."
The letter from Doe comes after she filed a lawsuit in September against the university, the Chi Phi fraternity chapter at Cornell, seven men and others, saying that she was sexually assaulted in October 2024 at the fraternity house. The men implicated in the lawsuit have denied wrongdoing.
In the letter addressed to faculty, Doe wrote that she learned of a conversation a sorority president had with Kotlikoff after Doe reported her case in November 2024. Doe said that Kotlikoff's initial response to the conversation "was along the lines of, 'Why did she wait so long to report it?'"
"She interpreted his question as an expression of doubt in the veracity of my story," Doe wrote of the sorority president's impression.
Doe said she wrote the letter to "provide information that its members may wish to consider or investigate further."
Cornell University disputed Doe's characterization of the event.
"The second-hand account of the question asked by President Kotlikoff in a January 2025 meeting in the letter is incorrect, based on a documented first-hand account," a university spokesperson wrote in a statement. "The question 'why did it take so long for the assault to be reported' was directed at bystanders who did not use Cornell's anonymous tip line, despite ongoing social media activity about the incident in October 2024. He was not questioning Jane Doe's reporting."
A university official with knowledge of the conversation but who requested anonymity also said that they understood Kotlikoff's comments to be about why bystanders did not report the alleged assault sooner.
A separate member of the university said Doe's letter was sent only about an hour before the first faculty senate debate earlier this month, making it difficult to verify the letter and present it to faculty in time for the meeting. News outlets obtained the letter before some faculty were able to see the statement themselves.
"It was kind of a mystifying and another enraging moment in that it helped to perpetuate the feeling that there's an effort to keep things quiet," Kim said.
A resolution that has divided faculty
It's unclear how the faculty senate will ultimately vote on the matter. But of those who spoke during the first faculty meeting earlier this month, about two-thirds of the speakers said they supported the resolution, while the remaining individuals suggested postponing a vote until an independent investigation conducted by the university can present more information.
Proponents of the resolution say the measure would serve as an important first step in rebuilding trust with students and alumni, while opponents of the resolution assert it would do little to meaningfully address the problems at hand.
The debate has left some faculty unsure of how senior officials, including the board of trustees, can help the university move forward.
"If I were one of the trustees, my strongest interest … would be in reconciling the Cornell community to the central administration, which is now, I think, almost completely wrecked. And the question is how would I do this,'" Bensel said. "I think it's very, very difficult at this point for the president to be the agent in that reconciliation."
Still, Bensel admits that calls for Kotlikoff to resign by a growing number of Cornell community members bring up unanswered questions.
"I'm not sure what the answer to that is without knowing what the alternative is," Bensel said of suggestions for Kotlikoff to step down. "Somebody has to be president. … But I think President Kotlikoff is not an effective agent for that reconciliation."
Copyright 2026 WSKG News