Judge questions NY AG Letitia James over pre-case social media posts

A New York judge left the door open on Thursday to question whether Attorney General Letitia James should lead the state's criminal investigation into a 2024 fraternity party assault at Cornell University. Judge James R. Farrell heard arguments in Monticello, New York, but did not immediately rule on the motion to remove James from the case.

The legal challenge centers on social media posts James made in September, before she officially took over the investigation. In a post dated Sept. 28, James linked to an article about the lawsuit and wrote, “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.” She previously described the allegations as “horrific and unacceptable” and referred to the complainant as a survivor. The man's attorneys argue these comments prove James had already decided the allegations were true.

The case was filed in Albany but argued in Monticello, a town about 72 miles northwest of Manhattan. The other man named in the civil suit has also filed a similar motion in Ithaca, where Cornell is located, though no hearing has been scheduled there yet. The man’s lawyer, Andrew Miltenberg, told reporters that thousands of other qualified officials, including retired judges and mediators, could handle the probe. Another attorney for the accused, Stuart Bernstein, stated that James has shown she is not objective and is biased.

State lawyers argued that Governor Kathy Hochul has wide discretion in appointing special prosecutors. They contended that Hochul selected James because of her experience with high-profile, sensitive cases. Assistant Attorney General Kaitlin Vigars told the court that actual prejudice is required to disqualify a prosecutor. Vigars noted that because no criminal charges have been filed yet, the challenging man cannot argue he has been directly harmed by the investigation's direction.

Judge Farrell pressed the state's team on the propriety of James' comments. He asked, “Is that a problem?” when referring to her social media activity prior to the appointment. When Vigars did not directly answer whether it was improper for a prosecutor to make such statements, the judge asked again, “You wouldn’t agree with me?” Farrell also inquired about the potential for multiple investigations if his ruling applied to only some of the defendants in the civil suit.

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

Governor Hochul appointed James to the case on Oct. 1, removing it from the local district attorney's office. In her appointment order, Hochul called for an objective review free of conflict or bias. On Oct. 2, Hochul said she had every confidence in her attorney general to look at the facts and draw proper conclusions. Hochul stated she had no qualms about the naming of James for the role.

James has addressed the criticism of her online activity during her campaign against Republican challenger Saritha Komatireddy. At an Oct. 8 debate, she said her comments demonstrate empathy, a quality she believes is needed in government. She asserted that her office will conduct the investigation based on facts and evidence, stating that politics stops at the door. James has not attended the hearings in Monticello.

Farrell gave the man’s legal team one week to explain why the other men named in the lawsuit have not joined this specific effort to remove James. The judge is currently weighing whether the pre-appointment social media posts create a conflict of interest that warrants handing the investigation to another prosecutor. The decision will determine if the state's top law enforcement officer continues to lead the probe into the 2024 incident.

The hearing lasted more than an hour, during which Farrell quizzed both sides on the procedural implications of the appointment. The outcome in Monticello may influence the parallel motion pending in Ithaca. As of Thursday, the investigation remains under James' supervision while the court deliberates on the challenge.