Since the early 1960s, American courts have wisely and successfully resisted the urge to transform college and school conduct proceedings into mini criminal courtrooms. While mandating basic due process elements, courts have not considered formal due process protections such as cross-examination a necessity. Until now. 

Starting in 2017, some courts have become more interventionist with respect to cases involving campus conduct proceedings, especially sexual misconduct resolutions conducted pursuant to Title IX. Since then, the Sixth Circuit, state courts in California, and federal courts in Pennsylvania have continued to expand the due process required by public universities and have started to mandate some form of cross-examination as part of campus conduct proceedings. 

ATIXA issues this  position statement to encourage these courts to reassess their due process demands, and to similarly encourage other courts to avoid sliding down a slippery slope that will turn college hearings into quasi-criminal courts. Requiring direct, live cross-examination is antithetical to the administrative and educational nature of college disciplinary proceedings. It is also unnecessary and of unknown efficacy. While the Sixth Circuit has referenced the Wigmore quote that "cross-examination is beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth," Wigmore made this pronouncement in reference to the 6th Amendment right to confrontation in criminal proceedings, not in the context of campus disciplinary proceedings.