INDEPENDENT MEDIA · FACTUAL REPORTINGSOURCE-LED · INDEPENDENT COLLECTIVE
Cornell Alleged.Help the cause

THE RECORD. THE RESPONSE. THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD.

CASE ARCHIVE · UC BerkeleyUC Berkeley · Marcy · 2015
Choose another case
Back to the case archive
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY

Marcy: harassment finding, resignation and disciplinary response

UC Berkeley’s leadership confirmed a sexual-harassment policy finding against astronomy professor Geoff Marcy and accepted his resignation in October 2015.

Institutional accountability

Read the university’s account alongside dated external developments. Leadership roles, allegations and findings are distinguished.

Added Updated
SOURCE-LINKED CASE RECORDUC Berkeley2015

Administrative finding · Resignation

STATUS AT 5 OCT 2026
Administrative finding · Resignation

What is documented?

The university’s October 14 statement confirms the administrative finding and resignation, acknowledges criticism of its response and explains its disciplinary-policy position.

Limits of this record

This record concerns a university policy finding, not a criminal conviction. The university’s account of procedural limits is its explanation; this archive does not determine that every available response was adequate. No current institutional role is inferred.

The dated record

Compare institutions →

Leadership & court roles

Roles are recorded at the relevant time. Holding an office, deciding a legal question or being named in a report does not establish individual wrongdoing.
University leadership

Nicholas B. Dirks and Claude Steele

Chancellor and executive vice chancellor / provost · 14 October 2015

Signed the institutional explanation of the finding, response and resignation.

Source for this role ↗

Source date: 14 Oct 2015 · Checked 5 Oct 2026

Sourcebook

1 linked records
Administrative finding / institutional response

UC Berkeley · leadership statement on Marcy resignation ↗

Source date: 14 Oct 2015 · Checked 5 Oct 2026

Confirms policy violation finding and resignation; states administration’s explanation of disciplinary constraints. Not a criminal verdict.