Judge Farrell Questions Attorney General's Role in Cornell Rape Probe

A New York state judge is deciding whether Attorney General Letitia James’ public social media posts about a Cornell University rape case should disqualify her from leading the criminal investigation. The dispute centers on whether James’ comments, made before she was appointed to the case, show she had already formed an opinion on the merits of the allegations.

The issue came before Judge James R. Farrell during arguments on Thursday in Monticello, New York. A man accused in the underlying civil lawsuit is seeking James' removal from the probe. His lawyers argue that her posts demonstrate she believed the accuser's story before reviewing evidence. In a post from September 28, James linked to news coverage of the lawsuit and wrote, "I’m holding her in her heart and in my prayers. To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you."

James, a Democrat, did not attend the hearing. She has previously stated that her investigation will be guided only by the facts, the evidence, and the law. The state’s lawyers argued for a quick dismissal of the challenge, noting that Governor Kathy Hochul has broad authority to appoint special prosecutors. They pointed to James’ track record with high-profile cases as the reason for her selection.

The underlying civil lawsuit was filed in September by a former Cornell student, identified as Jane Doe. She alleged that several men raped her at a fraternity party in 2024. According to the complaint, some of the men pressured her into using ketamine, which left her too intoxicated to consent. The county district attorney had previously declined to bring charges in 2024.

Judge Farrell pressed the state lawyers on the timing of James' appointment. He asked, "Is that a problem?" referring to the fact that Hochul appointed James while knowing she had commented on the case. Assistant Attorney General Kaitlin Vigars responded that "there has to be actual prejudice" to disqualify a prosecutor. Vigars noted that the challenging man cannot argue he has been harmed because no criminal charges have yet been filed.

The judge continued to probe the state’s position, asking, "You would agree with me, that it’s not proper for a prosecutor to make those statements?" When Vigars did not directly answer, Farrell asked, "You wouldn’t agree with me?" He later gave the man’s lawyers one week to explain why other defendants in the civil suit had not joined this specific motion to remove James.

Stuart Bernstein, a lawyer for the man fighting James’ appointment, told reporters that the attorney general "has shown she is not objective. He said she has shown that she is biased." Andrew Miltenberg, another lawyer for the accused, argued that thousands of other qualified individuals, including retired judges and district attorneys, could have handled the investigation.

James addressed her social media activity during a debate on October 8 against her Republican challenger, Saritha Komatireddy. She said the comments demonstrated empathy and that politics stops at the door in her office. Hochul, who appointed James as special prosecutor on October 1, expressed full confidence in her to examine the record and draw proper conclusions.

The case is being heard in Albany, while arguments took place in Monticello, roughly 72 miles northwest of Manhattan. A separate legal challenge was filed in Ithaca by lawyers for two other men named in the lawsuit, but no arguments have been scheduled there yet. Farrell asked both sides to clarify whether his ruling should apply to all defendants in the civil case.

The judge concluded the hour-long session by pressing the defense on potential procedural complications if multiple investigations were led by different prosecutors. He left the court without issuing an immediate ruling, directing the parties to address the status of the other named defendants within the next week.