The Cornell Seven

Editors’ Notes

A gang rape allegation at Cornell University has come back to light after the accuser filed a lawsuit alleging the university did not handle her case appropriately when she reported it in 2024.

One question—posed by Jane Doe’s lawsuit—is what Cornell owes her and whether it lived up to those obligations. Another question—posed by commentator Michael Tracey (Lean Left)—is whether Jane Doe owes anything to the public. Assuming she is a victim, it seems cruel to drag her name and reputation through a muck of public scrutiny over a trauma she didn’t ask for. On the other hand, Tracey argues that without knowing anything about her, the public isn’t able to determine whether she is a victim, and if there’s even the slightest chance she hasn’t been honest, the public should know before the pitchforks come out.

Legally, Jane Doe faces a high burden of proof. New York State law says those who are voluntarily intoxicated cannot claim to be so incapacitated that they cannot consent unless they can prove physical helplessness. All evidence seems to point to the fact that Jane Doe had a horrific experience that night at the Chi Phi house in October, and no doubt all the public scrutiny makes it unimaginably more difficult, even without her name being public. But whether her experience was simply awful or could be punishable under criminal law is for a New York court to determine.

News About the Cornell Seven

In 2024, a student identified as Jane Doe reported that she was the victim of a gang rape at a Chi Phi fraternity party to the Cornell University police. She recently filed a civil lawsuit against Cornell University, university faculty, the Chi Phi Fraternity, and the seven alleged perpetrators of the rape, accusing the university of inadequately responding to the alleged crime.

The police concluded that no crime had occurred based on Doe’s initial statements that the drug use and sexual encounter were voluntary and consensual, however the lawsuit suggests she was coerced. The lawsuit also alleges that the accused were offered the opportunity to write essays to mitigate their punishment. Cornell University emphasized the essays were never a “sole punishment.” The Chi Phi fraternity was shut down and banned from campus, and Doe’s lawyers have said that two of the seven perpetrators were expelled. New York prosecutors have reopened the case following the lawsuit.

The Cornell Daily Sun named the seven accused men from the lawsuit and called on the university to be more transparent. In response, commentator Michael Tracey called on Jane Doe to reveal her identity so people can judge the veracity of her allegations. His statements spurred a wave of social media reactions that said, “I am Jane Doe.”

A mother of an active-duty member of the Marine Corps who happens to share a name with one of the seven accused men but never attended Cornell said her family has been “terrorized, threatened, and harassed” over the case.

Read more:

• NY Prosecutors Reopen Cornell Rape Case After Lawsuit From Alleged Victim

Analysis and Opinions about the Cornell Case

Voices on the left drew comparisons to Eric Swalwell, Graham Platner, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Jeffery Epstein, arguing that wealthy men often believe they can avoid accountability for rape allegations. The right was more likely to compare the case to “the Duke lacrosse team rape hoax, the ‘Mattress Girl’ rape hoax, and the Rolling Stone/University of Virginia rape hoax.” Several noted inconsistences between the initial police report and later lawsuit and argued that immorality doesn’t mean the act was illegal based on New York’s statutes.

A psychotherapist and Cornell alumni wrote in Newsweek (Center), “We talk about campus sexual assault as a problem of consent, and it is. We talk about it as a problem of fraternity culture, and it is. We don't talk nearly enough about the fact that alcohol and drugs are the medium it happens in. One thing needs saying plainly, because it always gets twisted: alcohol and drugs don't cause rape and they excuse nothing. Plenty of men drink and never hurt anyone. The violence is a choice. But when substances run unchecked through a house full of young men, they knock down every barrier that might have stopped it, and they give everyone a ready-made story for the morning after. Put limits on the substances and an adult in the building, and I believe fewer nights like this one happen.”

Kat Rosenfield wrote for the Free Press (Lean Right), “The original statement describes a sloppy but consensual series of interactions between the woman and the seven men, involving sex, drugs, alcohol, or some combination of the three. But in the new lawsuit, which names the seven men, the fraternity, her own sorority, and the university itself as defendants, Jane Doe tells a different story: that having arrived at the frat house already drunk, she was categorically incapable of consenting to anything that happened after she got there… By the woman’s own account, the men’s behavior had been manipulative, crass, vulgar, and unkind, but also entirely legal—and her intoxication, because it was voluntary and did not leave her physically incapacitated, did not render her incapable of consent according to New York State law.”

A piece in The Advocate (Lean Left) argued, “The accusations paint a picture of frat boys with an inflated sense of entitlement, with clearly no respect for women, and no respect for decency, who allowed their puffed-up bro-ness to damage a woman for the rest of her life…People are not only angry about what allegedly happened. They are angry about the presumption that it would disappear. That presumption is entitlement and the smug certainty that the rules don’t apply to you, and if something bad happens, someone will handle it, it will go away, and the life you planned will still be waiting.”

A Cornell Daily Sun (not rated) piece said, “Let me be clear: Public outrage is correct and should be the prevailing reaction to any kind of sexual violence. However, when it begins to take on a life of its own — such as it has for this case, whose alleged perpetrators are now dubbed ‘the Cornell 7’ — is it productive? And, more importantly, is it respectful to victims of sexual violence?… It’s deeply unsettling to see people follow a ‘viral video’ archetype to talk about this case… Harbor this rage, feel the pain and don’t forget — but, please, have some respect when you talk about the events and the victim.”