A civil lawsuit filed last month against seven men connected to Cornell University, brought by a woman identified only as Jane Doe who alleges she was gang-raped in 2024, has become the center of a dispute between a New York Times writer and conservative commentators over how the case is being covered.
The men named in the suit have been referred to online as the “Cornell Seven.” Their names were first published by Cornell’s student newspaper, and Doe’s lawsuit names each of them individually.
New York Times writer Nathan Tayler Pemberton wrote Monday that he saw a “newfound unity” among what he called the “online right,” which he attributed to the group having found, in his words, “a woman to hate on.” Pemberton wrote that skeptics of the allegations have sought to “portray Doe as a kind of out-of-control sexual fiend” and argued that critics are “unable to dispute the basic narrative of the assault.”
The Federalist, in a column responding to Pemberton’s piece, disputed both claims. The outlet pointed to details contained in Doe’s own lawsuit, writing that the filing describes her getting drunk and going to a fraternity house to see a male friend before what the column described as a “drug-fueled threesome.” According to the Federalist’s account of the suit, Doe told people at the time that the encounter was consensual and later told others she had engaged in group sex without indicating she felt she had been assaulted. The column also said Doe had told one of the men involved she was looking forward to attending a future party at the same house.
The Federalist wrote that Doe began describing the sex as nonconsensual only after she was disinvited from that later party, and that she filed her lawsuit roughly two years after the incident. The column also noted that Doe’s lawyer has argued her sorority bears some responsibility for allowing her to leave the sorority house that night.
Pemberton’s column had also criticized online efforts to identify Doe, which he described as “relentlessly harassing.” The Federalist countered that the seven men named in the suit have had their own names and faces published, both by Cornell’s student newspaper and in the lawsuit itself, and argued that criticism of efforts to identify Doe should be weighed against that fact.
Neither Cornell University nor attorneys for the parties were quoted directly in either the Times column or the Federalist’s response as described in the source material reviewed for this report.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login