A New York state judge on Thursday heard arguments over whether Attorney General Letitia James should be removed as special prosecutor in a renewed criminal investigation into gang rape allegations at Cornell University, after defense lawyers argued her social media posts demonstrated bias against the accused.
Judge James R. Farrell of Sullivan County Supreme Court did not immediately rule on the challenge filed by lawyers for Gillio Lopes, one of seven former Cornell fraternity members named in a lawsuit alleging sexual assault. The lawsuit, filed by a former Cornell student identified in court documents as Jane Doe, claims she was raped at a fraternity party in October 2024 after being pressured to consume ketamine, marijuana, and alcohol, leaving her too intoxicated to consent.
Lopes’ attorneys contended that James’ appointment as special prosecutor is no longer viable because of her public statements expressing support for the accuser. On Sept. 28, three days before her appointment, James posted on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook: “What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I’m holding her in my heart and in my prayers. To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you.”
Defense Arguments
Stuart Bernstein, one of Lopes’ attorneys, told the court that James had failed in her obligation to represent all New Yorkers and had publicly aligned herself with the complainant, stating, “She has shown that she has picked sides.” Bernstein argued that her posts created an unequivocal bias and presumption of guilt against the defendants.
James’ office filed a formal opposition to the challenge last week, asserting that Lopes’ petition was not justiciable and that his attorneys lacked standing to contest her appointment. The office argued that the governor’s executive order appointing James as special prosecutor falls within the governor’s discretion and is not subject to judicial review in this context.
Background of the Case
The renewed investigation was initiated after Gov. Kathy Hochul signed an executive order on Oct. 1, transferring the case from Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten, who had declined to bring charges in 2024. James, a Democrat, was appointed to oversee the probe, which has drawn significant attention due to its high-profile nature and the involvement of multiple defendants.
Lawyers for two of the accused men filed challenges to James’ appointment within days of her selection. One challenge was heard Thursday in Monticello, New York, while another is pending in Tompkins County, where Cornell University is located. James is not expected to attend Thursday’s hearing.
Legal and Procedural Context
The defense’s challenge hinges on whether a prosecutor’s public statements about a case can be grounds for disqualification. James’ office has pushed back, arguing that her social media posts were expressions of empathy for a survivor and did not constitute legal bias. The office further contended that the challenge is procedurally defective and substantively meritless, emphasizing that the governor’s authority to appoint a special prosecutor is broad and not typically subject to judicial second-guessing.
The outcome of Thursday’s hearing could set a precedent for how future challenges to prosecutorial appointments are evaluated, particularly in cases involving high-profile allegations and public figures. The judge’s decision is pending.