Megan Cooney | Columnist
Title IX is the federal law often associated with gender equality in sports but it also applies to sex-based harassment, assault and violence in schools receiving federal funds.
Those latter elements are the focus of reflection on Cornell University’s contentious Title IX investigation into a sophomore student’s complaint two years ago that seven male students drugged and raped her at their fraternity house.
Last month she filed a civil lawsuit as Jane Doe against the frat brothers, their Chi Phi fraternity, her Tri-Delta sorority, a local bar and Cornell officials. She contends they were culpable in one way or another in the sexual assault and Cornell’s handling of it.
The details of the lawsuit are awful and already widely known, including her statement she was pressured into snorting ketamine, smoking pot and drinking alcohol when she was already partially incapacitated.
Yet the local district attorney declined to file criminal charges. He based his decision on a campus police summary of its investigation that included inferences of consensual behavior.
Yes, it is a sprawling and confusing case, causing widespread outrage. But many people are also tired of reading about it. Here is why you shouldn’t do that.
Cornell was obligated to conduct a Title IX investigation. The law mandates how school authorities treat students who report sexual assault and the students accused of it.
The gang rape investigation included 50 interviews with 32 witnesses, social media evidence and a 12-day disciplinary hearing in May of 2025. Two of the students were expelled and the others given various degrees of suspension. Chi Phi fraternity was shut down and permanently banned from the campus.
Scrutiny of Cornell’s Title IX inquiry is focused on rules revised by the first Trump administration in 2020 and whether they improved due process or unfairly raised barriers for victims to receive support from academic institutions.
The change in rules governed how Cornell handled the Jane Doe case in 2024 even though it occurred under the Biden administration’s tougher Title IX requirements. But a federal judge ruled the Trump changes and not the Biden rules applied.
Shiwali Patel of the National Women’s Law Center said in an interview the 2020 rules let schools reject many complaints by excluding assaults that happened off campus and complaints by former students. Patel also said the Trump changes subjected those who come forward to a traumatic, courtroom-style process.
Cornell applied the type of hearing process Patel described. According to the university’s Title IX office post, the 2024 final (Biden) regulations “will not be enforced at Cornell until further guidance is provided by the Department of Education.”
Patel said shifts in Title IX rules have impacted college students. She said they are less trusting of the investigative process and feel schools are more apt to protect their reputation or satisfy wealthy donors.
Reputational scarring is happening to Cornell. CNN reports the Ivy League school has written damage-control letters to high school counselors acknowledging they may now have mixed feelings about recommending students apply for admission to Cornell.
But don’t look away. Millions of students deserve our attention to Title IX. At risk is tilting the scales to harm either the rights of victims or the rights of the accused.
Why can’t we agree to pursue change that protects both? Maybe the Cornell Jane Doe case, as messy as it is, will shine a light on a problem too big to ignore.
Megan Giles Cooney is a columnist for the Traverse City (MI) Record-Eagle. Reach her atmegangilescooney@gmail.com
