US Universities' Systemic Failures Leave Sexual Assault Victims Unprotected

The internal processes at Cornell University for addressing sexual assault reports demonstrably failed "Jane Doe," a third-year student who reported being sexually assaulted by seven men in 2024 while incapacitated at a fraternity house. Despite an investigation lasting months, the process did not yield the accountability Jane Doe sought, leaving her feeling unheard and unsafe, ultimately causing her to drop out without completing her degree. No criminal charges were filed against the accused men, and she is now suing Cornell for its mishandling of her case. The administrators involved have not been identified and have yet to face consequences.

Her experience highlights how confidential university procedures are often designed to suppress issues rather than deliver justice for victims. Furthermore, it underscores the primary investment of those in authority—deans, provosts, presidents, Title IX and Affirmative Action officers, and university lawyers—in protecting their institutions, rather than advocating for vulnerable students, staff, or faculty.

Sexual assaults against students, predominantly women, occur weekly on campuses across the United States. A 2025 survey at Cornell University revealed that 35 percent of undergraduate women reported experiencing nonconsensual sexual contact involving force or incapacitation since enrolling. This issue is not isolated to Cornell; a similar 2025 survey at Michigan State University found that approximately one in five undergraduate women had experienced sexual assault during their enrollment.

The majority of these incidents go unreported. A U.S. Department of Justice study indicated that fewer than 5 percent of completed and attempted rapes are reported to the police. Students and their parents need to recognize that the reporting pathways for violations are deliberately convoluted and often non-functional. Despite administrators' public assurances, their touted systems are intentionally difficult to navigate.

These administrators, often senior faculty and staff who appear welcoming, ultimately answer to the institution, making them unreliable allies for victims. Victims are expected to meticulously document their experiences, even amidst ongoing trauma, and repeatedly recount the assault to campus police and administrators. Research indicates that this repetitive recounting exacerbates trauma by forcing victims to relive the violation.

Educational institutions frequently employ strategic incompetence, blaming non-functional systems for their inability to address legitimate concerns. Administrators may feign care while directing complainants through a maze of offices, a tactic designed to exhaust them. Feminist scholar Sara Ahmed, in her 2021 book Complaint!, argues that this process frames the complainant as the problem, thereby neutralizing the threat they pose and reinforcing the consequences for demanding accountability. This strategic dysfunction serves to protect the institution and silence victims.

The "broken" system encourages victims to handle matters internally, with assurances that institutional processes are less damaging than police reporting. Disciplinary proceedings are kept secret, ostensibly for victim privacy, though institutions' motivations often stem from a desire to avoid scrutiny. Dr. Sonia Cheruvillil, a public health advocate, notes that legal recourse is rare in sexual violence cases, with most crimes going unreported due to perpetrators being known to the victim. She states, "Authorities are not safe. University campuses are a microcosm of a larger eco-system of harm that keeps survivors and victims in place, individualizes their experience, and denies them justice."

Students may lack family support, as some families discourage formal complaints. While universities promote sexual assault education programs and mandate compliance exercises for faculty and staff, actual reporting often yields little response. The "safe zone" flyers and zero-tolerance policies are often mere public relations strategies, masking inaction. Affirmative Action and Title IX officers, often women or members of minoritized groups, are appointed to positions that appear to safeguard vulnerable individuals but are frequently used to perform "affective labor"—to placate and create a false sense of institutional empathy, ultimately betraying victims through inaction or policy obfuscation. Rinaldo Walcott, former professor of Africana and American Studies at the University at Buffalo, explains that these individuals are essential for institutions to avoid accountability and perpetuate a culture of impunity.

At Cornell University, colleagues are organizing teach-ins and protests, collaborating with students to demand change. While some advocate for trauma-informed approaches, those with firsthand experience of institutional violence recognize their limitations. Better communication, consent education, or fraternity party bans may not suffice. Cornell University's "failure" was, in fact, a successful strategy to protect its reputation and donor funding.

Given these systematically broken systems, the focus must shift to building independent support systems outside of universities. Only through robust, independent support and significant public outcry—affecting public perception and donor funds—might institutions be compelled to take minimal action. Universities and their administrators are motivated by shame and the fear of losing power and positions. Working against these forces by building solidarity, shame, and leveraging fear of reputational damage and financial loss is the only way to compel these "strategically broken" systems to act.