‘Cornell 7’ case casts spotlight on NY’s ‘voluntary intoxication’ loophole -- which doesn't protect rape victims who drink, take drugs on their own
A New York law that effectively legalizes rape of intoxicated victims has blocked justice for decades — and Assembly Democrats have quietly killed the fix, with one calling it the 'ruining drunk sex bill.'
AI summary
Generated by Yank from this source. A summary, not quoted language.
A New York state law known as the 'voluntary intoxication loophole' leaves rape victims unprotected if they chose to drink or take drugs themselves, even if they were too incapacitated to consent.
Yank summary
What matters, in Yank’s words, each linked to where the source says it.
DA Van Houten cited current law to justify not investigating Jane Doe's gang rape report, admitting Bill A101 would have required further investigation. In the source
Under current New York law, if a victim does not say 'no' or is not physically unconscious, the law treats her as having consented, Van Houten told The Post. In the source
A version of Dinowitz's bill passed the state Senate 60-0 in June but never received a floor vote in the Assembly. In the source
Assemblyman Burke reportedly called the measure 'the ruining drunk sex bill,' though his office says he will vote yes if Speaker Heastie schedules it. In the source
NYU professor Erin Murphy says the bill's 'appraising or controlling' standard is 'a pretty elastic standard' but still a significant improvement over current law. In the source
The five worth keeping
The five are Yank’s choice. Want something else?
Getting drunk should not be an invitation to getting raped but in the current law, it pretty much is.
Assemblyman Jeffery DinowitzAssemblyman Jeffery Dinowitz quote
A sitting assemblyman who has fought the law since 2019 frames legal protection as the bare minimum victims deserve.
In context
The “voluntary intoxication loophole” refers to how current state law doesn’t cover rape victims who chose to drink or get high themselves, even if it means they were too incapacitated to consent later. “Getting drunk should not be an invitation to getting raped but in the current law, it pretty much is,” state Assemblyman Jeffery Dinowitz — who has backed a bill that would change the law since 2019 — told The Post. “We originally refer to it as a loophole, in fact it is more than a loophole, that’s why we refer to it as the ”voluntary intoxication exclusion.’ Sexual assault victims who are voluntarily intoxicated, there’s virtually no chance that they are going to get justice,” he said.
Receipt
Because if she doesn't say 'no' during the events or if she is not physically helpless or physically unconscious, then the law in New York as it is written now indicates that she consented.
Sofia PoznanskyDA Van Houten quote
A former DA spells out exactly how current New York law turns a victim's silence or consciousness into implied consent.
In context
“Yes, we would have, under the law, had to investigate further and determine what other individuals knew or should have known about her mental state,” Van Houten told The Post. “Because if she doesn’t say ‘no’ during the events or if she is not physically helpless or physically unconscious, then the law in New York as it is written now indicates that she consented.” The proposed bill aims to protect a victim who, under the influence of a drug or substance, rendered themselves “temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling such person’s conduct.”
Receipt
This is a glaring omission that advocates have been pointing to for decades.
Sofia PoznanskyJane Manning quote
A sex-crimes prosecutor frames the gap not as oversight but as a long-known failure that advocates have repeatedly tried to fix.
In context
Jane Manning, a former sex-crimes prosecutor and director of the Women’s Equal Justice Project, said the Cornell case was an opportunity for legislators to see where the law falls short — and remedy it. “New York State law makes it more difficult than it should be to prosecute a case like this because it defines rape so narrowly that it fails to protect a severely intoxicated person from sexual assault unless the person is truly unconscious,” Manning said. “This is a glaring omission that advocates have been pointing to for decades.” Start your day with all you need to know
Receipt
A bill to protect severely intoxicated rape victims passed the state Senate 60-0 in June but was never brought to a floor vote in the Democratic-controlled Assembly, with one member privately calling it the 'ruining drunk sex bill.'
Sofia PoznanskyReporting on legislative history
The Senate's unanimous vote collides with Assembly inaction, and a member's private nickname reveals why the bill stalled.
In context
Lawyer for ‘Cornell 7’ gang rape accuser reveals his plan after DA says it will reopen case But the Democratic-controlled state Legislature has repeatedly failed to close the loophole, and while a version of Dinowitz’s bill passed the state Senate 60-0 in June, it never made it to a floor vote in the lower chamber. Advocate Chris Lake, a NAACP member and co-chair of the Justice Without Exclusion Coalition said that Assemblyman Pat Burke (D-Buffalo) even admitted to him “me and my colleagues call this the ruining drunk sex bill.”
A bill to protect severely intoxicated rape victims passed the state Senate 60-0 in June it but was never made it brought to a floor vote in the lower chamber. Advocate Chris Lake, a NAACP Democratic-controlled Assembly, with one member privately calling it the 'ruining drunk sex bill.'
Receipt
It makes space for someone to be conscious and yet not capable of expressing willingness.
Sofia PoznanskyErin Murphy quote
A law professor identifies what the proposed bill would accomplish that current law cannot: protecting conscious but incapacitated victims.
In context
Erin Murphy, professor of civil liberties at New York University School of Law, said that had the legal standard been amended as proposed, there would have been a clear cut case for prosecutors to bring rape charges back in 2024. But she said that the language of the proposed bill could still be tighter. “The problem with ‘appraising or controlling’ is that it’s a pretty elastic standard,” she said, but added, “It does do something very important as compared to the current law. “It makes space for someone to be conscious and yet not capable of expressing unwillingness or in my preferred formulation, of expressing willingness.” — Additional reporting by Vaughn Golden
It makes space for someone to be conscious and yet not capable of expressing unwillingness or in my preferred formulation, of expressing willingness.
Receipt
Ask this source
Ask about anything in this article. Yank answers only from what the source says, shows you where, and tells you when the source doesn’t say.
Answers are written by Yank from the source, for you. Nothing you ask is saved or published.