Drinking and consent - Cornell rape allegations expose 'loopholes' in laws
A lawsuit against Cornell University fraternity members has ignited a debate over New York's 'voluntary intoxication' laws regarding sexual assault. Critics argue the law creates a loophole that makes it difficult for victims who were drinking to prove non-consent.
Why it matters
The case highlights a significant legal and social debate regarding how intoxication impacts the definition of consent in sexual assault cases.
A backlash over the handling of a US woman's sexual assault complaint against Cornell University fraternity members has highlighted what experts believe are issues with the current laws in many states regarding sexual assault and drinking.
The woman, known as Jane Doe in legal documents, last month filed a lawsuit alleging she was drugged and raped by several men in 2024 at the university in the state of New York.
Doe said she had been drinking earlier in the evening of the alleged incident and then went to a fraternity house, where several men pressured her to snort the drug ketamine and plied her with alcohol before advertising a "free" sexual encounter with her in a group message.
She said she was intoxicated during the alleged incident and could not provide consent.
Also covering this story
One other newsroom covered this event. We read that version too.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in