Legal experts are divided over the involvement of New York Attorney General Letitia James in a high-profile sexual assault case at Cornell University. Fox News legal editor Kerri Urbahn joined Lawrence Jones to examine the controversy surrounding the accusation against Cornell students. Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten defended his decision not to press charges, stating insufficient evidence as the reason.
The panel delved into the legal ramifications of Letitia James’s public comments on social media. In a response to the lawsuit from a female student alleging sexual assault by seven men at the Chi Phi fraternity house in 2024, Cornell University took decisive action. University President Michael Kotlikoff announced a ban on fraternity parties for the rest of the 2026-2027 academic year, aiming to review and enhance safety in fraternity life.
“All parties and social events in Interfraternity Council (IFC) houses at Cornell will be suspended for the remainder of the 2026-2027 academic year,” Kotlikoff stated. “These measures will provide time for a thorough review of fraternity life at Cornell to determine whether and how it can safely continue.”
The alleged incident in question took place between October 19 and October 20, 2024. The student, known in court documents as Jane Doe, first reported the matter to university police on November 8, 2024. Despite disciplinary action from Cornell against some of the accused, no criminal charges have been filed.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul appointed the state attorney general’s office as a special prosecutor to investigate the claims. Additionally, Cornell employed former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates to conduct an independent review.
Some accused individuals have requested that Letitia James be removed from the case, citing concerns over her previous social media support for the alleged victim. This request emerges amidst detailed allegation adjustments and discrepancies noted in sworn statements and police interviews.
Tompkins County Attorney Van Houten highlighted these discrepancies, noting substantial handwritten alterations in the documents. Sally Yates’s independent review aims to scrutinize these crucial elements of the case.