Cornell University faculty are one step closer to voting on whether to issue a resolution of no confidence against the university’s senior leadership over how the school has handled the alleged 2024 rape of a student and sexual assaults on campus.
Despite efforts from a group of faculty, a measure to delay the vote failed 48-76 on Wednesday, suggesting that the no-confidence resolution could pass.
The decision to move forward with a vote of no confidence comes as faculty at the Ivy League school have spent weeks in sharp disagreement over whether to issue a symbolic—yet telling—show of opposition against Cornell’s president, Michael Kotlikoff, and senior officials. Faculty will vote from Oct. 29 until Nov. 6 on whether to issue a no-confidence measure.
Some faculty senators, one of whom described the no-confidence resolution “toothless” and “meaningless,” attempted to convince their colleagues to stall the vote until an independent investigation conducted by former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates released its findings.
But Professor Paul Ortiz, who is the lead author of the resolution, said the measure would acknowledge that the administration has failed to respond to sexual assault allegations made by a former student, known as Jane Doe, and other assaults reported by students, alumni and faculty.
“Cornell is just one example of universities that keep trapping generations of students in the same exhausting cycles of administrative indifference,” Ortiz said as he addressed his colleagues on Wednesday.
A vote of no confidence, Ortiz said, would serve as “a signal to our students and to this nation that we cherish the safety and wellbeing of all members of our community.”
The no-confidence resolution, which currently has about 20 faculty co-sponsors, is not binding, nor does it propose new policy directives. But it states that Cornell’s “central administration” has failed to “effectively address the ongoing crisis of sexual assault” at the university.
Faculty say students and alumni have felt disappointed by how the university has handled Doe’s case ever since the former student alleged that she was gang-raped at a fraternity house on Cornell’s campus in 2024.
Noah Tamarkin, a professor of anthropology and science and technology studies, said hearing from students pushed him to oppose the measure to delay a no-confidence vote.
“The students who have reached out to me, the students I'm in conversation with, they're very clear that they would see a delay here as a kind of furthering of the status quo of, ‘Cornell does nothing, they just kind of wait it out, and ultimately, we’re left to suffer. They ultimately don’t care,’” Tamarkin said. “And for me, that is at the core of why I don't have confidence right now.”
Michael Thompson, a materials science and engineering professor, said that while he was “appalled by the behavior of students and the lack of action by the university” and believes there are valid reasons for a no-confidence vote, he viewed the resolution as written as “intellectually dishonest.”
“The motion is intellectually dishonest by not including any … specific actions and no enumeration of any actions that we believe should have occurred,” Thompson wrote in an email to WSKG. In addressing faculty on Wednesday, he described the measure as a “toothless, meaningless resolution.”
Tense divisions between faculty have only continued to bubble ever since Doe filed a lawsuit in September against Cornell, seven men, and the university’s Chi Phi fraternity chapter.
In a letter addressed to faculty, Doe wrote that she felt, in particular, “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.