A former Cornell University student has filed a civil lawsuit alleging that seven fraternity members drugged and sexually assaulted her over several hours at a fraternity house in October 2024.

The allegations are horrifying. If true, they describe extremely serious crimes of a kind that can have devastating and lasting consequences for victims. How a university responds when a student reports such conduct is therefore a matter of legitimate concern extending well beyond an internal disciplinary dispute.

For donors and taxpayers, Cornell’s status as a publicly supported charitable institution adds another dimension to those concerns. Cornell is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charitable organization, and contributions to it are generally tax deductible. The university received $159 million in state and federal appropriations in fiscal 2025 and reported approximately $13.9 billion in net assets on its fiscal 2025 IRS Form 990.

Those benefits exist because education is recognized as a charitable purpose that serves the public.

That makes what Cornell knew, what it found, and how it responded to allegations of extraordinarily serious sexual violence not only a question about the treatment and protection of its students, but also a legitimate matter of concern for the donors and taxpayers whose support helps sustain the institution.

---

What Happened and Where Things Stand

The former student, identified as Jane Doe in court filings, alleges that she was drugged and sexually assaulted by multiple students at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house on October 19, 2024. The lawsuit names Cornell, seven current or former Cornell students, Chi Phi fraternity organizations and other defendants.

The allegations have not been proven in court, and the individual defendants are entitled to contest them.

Cornell conducted its own investigation and disciplinary proceedings after Doe reported the incident. The university has confirmed that sanctions imposed on students included suspensions and expulsions, although federal student privacy laws limit what Cornell says it can disclose about disciplinary actions against particular students. Doe’s attorney says only two of the seven accused students were expelled.

The lawsuit also alleges that some students were permitted to submit essays in mitigation of their conduct. Cornell disputes characterizations suggesting that writing an essay was the punishment imposed for involvement in the incident. The university says no student charged was offered an essay as the sole consequence and that consequential sanctions included suspensions and expulsions.

The criminal investigation is also evolving. The Tompkins County District Attorney’s Office initially declined to pursue charges following the 2024 investigation but announced on September 28, 2026, that it is reopening the case and intends to present it to a grand jury.

The civil allegations remain unresolved, and reopening a criminal investigation does not establish that a crime occurred or that any defendant is guilty.

For CharityWatch, however, another question remains important regardless of how the civil and criminal proceedings ultimately develop: What responsibilities accompany the substantial public benefits afforded to a tax-exempt university?

---

Cornell Receives Significant Public Benefits

Cornell is certainly not the first university to face allegations that it inadequately responded to reports of sexual assault. Similar controversies involving reports of serious sexual violence have arisen at colleges and universities across the country.

Cornell’s nonprofit status matters because the university receives substantial benefits from both taxpayers and donors. When public resources support a charitable institution, the public has a legitimate interest in how those resources are stewarded and whether the institution is responsibly carrying out the charitable mission that justifies that support.

Cornell is exempt from federal income tax on income related to its charitable mission, while qualifying contributions to the university are generally tax deductible. Cornell also reports receiving $159 million in state and federal appropriations in fiscal 2025.

New York State has an especially significant relationship with Cornell. Although Cornell is a private university, it operates four state-assisted statutory, or “contract,” colleges under New York law. These colleges receive direct funding from the state.

Receiving government support or maintaining tax-exempt status does not make Cornell responsible for every crime allegedly committed by a student.

But these public benefits are not granted simply because an institution calls itself a nonprofit. Tax exemption reflects a determination that an organization’s charitable activities provide benefits to the public sufficient to justify favorable treatment under the tax laws.

Education is one of the charitable purposes expressly recognized under federal tax law. A university therefore receives the benefits of charitable status because educating students is considered to serve the public good.

It is reasonable to expect that fulfilling this educational mission includes taking meaningful steps to provide an environment in which students can safely learn. An expectation of safety that should be extended equally to all genders.

---

Public Benefit Requires Public Trust

Tax exemption is not a declaration that a nonprofit institution is perfect. Universities will experience crimes, misconduct and difficult disciplinary cases. The existence of wrongdoing by a student does not, by itself, demonstrate wrongdoing by the institution.

The relevant question is how the institution responds.

For CharityWatch, responsible stewardship of a charitable institution encompasses more than safeguarding money.

Donors should care whether charitable assets are protected from theft. They should care whether executives misuse nonprofit resources. They should care whether boards fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities.

But a university’s charitable mission is not principally to accumulate assets or produce clean financial statements. Its mission centers on educating students and providing an environment in which that education can occur.

When a tax-exempt university is entrusted with tens of thousands of young people, how it responds to allegations of exceptionally serious sexual violence bears directly on that institutional responsibility.

The civil lawsuit against Cornell remains unresolved, the renewed criminal investigation is only beginning, and the allegations against the individual defendants have not been proven. Those facts require caution about reaching conclusions concerning what occurred inside the Chi Phi fraternity house.

They do not eliminate the nonprofit issue.

As the legal process proceeds, donors and taxpayers can reasonably ask what Cornell’s own disciplinary process found, what consequences followed those findings, and whether the institution’s response reflects the responsibilities that should accompany the considerable public trust and public benefits afforded to a tax-exempt university.

---

Will You Help CharityWatch Continue Our Important Work?

As the only independent charity watchdog organization in the United States, CharityWatch relies on your support to fund our in-depth research and analysis in order to bring you the unbiased charity ratings and other information you rely on to help you make more informed giving decisions. We are not directly or indirectly funded by nonprofit industry interests.

We hope you will consider making a donation today so that we can continue to speak openly and critically and call out wrongdoing when we see it without concern for special interests cutting our funding. CharityWatch is a small organization and your donations are noticed, needed, and greatly appreciated. Thank you for giving wisely!