A Cornell student – anonymised as Jane Doe – alleged that she was sexually assaulted on 19 October 2024 by seven members of the university’s Chi Phi fraternity. (Fraternities and sororities are private student organisations common at US universities.)

Doe, who was visibly intoxicated, says she was pushed by a friend and another fraternity member into snorting ketamine and was given more alcohol. She alleges that she was then taken into another room in the house, where seven fraternity members sexually assaulted her over seven hours, until 5.45am on 20 October.

She reported the assault to Cornell University Police on 8 November. However, district attorney Matthew Van Houten did not open a criminal investigation, basing that decision on a six-page statement that left out key information, according to Doe’s lawyer.

None of the seven male students – known as the ‘Cornell 7’ – were charged with a crime. Two were expelled, while five received lesser disciplinary measures, including writing an essay, attending workshops or suspension. Some of the men continue to attend Cornell. Doe left the university. The university also banned the fraternity.

After Doe filed a civil lawsuit against the university in September, the case is now being reopened by New York prosecutors. While this renewed investigation offers another opportunity for accountability, it also raises an uncomfortable question: why did it take a lawsuit and national backlash for the case to receive reconsideration?

Whose future gets protected?

What troubles me most is the possibility that a university may be more concerned with preserving the futures of its male students than confronting the terrible harm they may have caused. Even while the allegations remain subject to legal proceedings, protecting the rights of an accused student should not mean treating a complainant’s safety, education or future as secondary.

It is clear that the leaders of these institutions place great importance on their students’ future trajectories. But just as a suspension or expulsion can alter someone’s life, so can sexual violence.

The institutional priorities raise serious questions about whether these systems are more willing to preserve male potential and reputation than demand justice for women. Some 35% of undergraduate women at Cornell surveyed in 2025 reported experiencing non-consensual sexual contact involving force or incapacitation.

However, the problem extends beyond one university and points to a wider pattern of institutional neglect. Jane Doe has also spoken out about what she sees as a pattern of leniency towards men, not only at Cornell, but in the wider Ivy League community.

In New York state, only around 1% of sexual violence allegations between 2018 and 2024 resulted in expulsion for students or dismissal of university faculty, while another 2% resulted in suspension. This data is available because state law requires universities to disclose incidents involving sexual assault.

The situation at Cornell is far from new: other universities have faced scrutiny over their dealing of cases of sexual assault. However, it has drawn international attention because it raises questions of institutional neglect at an Ivy League university, one of the most respected symbols of higher education.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Harbingers’ Magazine (@hrb.mag)

This incident represents a gap between the prestige of an institution and the protection it offers its students. It is important to note that the story was revealed not by the university itself, but by Cornell’s newspaper, The Cornell Daily Sun, which is run by Cornell students but is financially and editorially independent of the university.

This distinction reveals another problem about accountability: students should not have to rely on their peers to seek change or demand justice. Even though involving other students can bring allegations to light, it cannot provide the protections that a university is responsible for delivering – and it shouldn’t have to.

The burden should not fall on a young woman to choose between the education she deserves and the protection she needs. No high school student should have to wonder whether being safe from sexual violence will come at the cost of their education when choosing a college.

Students should not have to rely on public outrage, national attention or pressure from their classmates before their concerns are taken seriously.