Teams

Katie Cox and Crystal Yu

**Content Warning: The facts of this problem concern intimate partner violence and the cases discussed include cases about sexual assault.**

I. Under what circumstances, if any, does the common law right to fair procedure require a private university to afford a student who is the subject of a disciplinary proceeding with the opportunity to utilize certain procedural processes, such as cross-examination of witnesses at a live hearing?

II. Did Prescott waive or forfeit any right he may have had to cross-examine witnesses at a live hearing?

III. Assuming it was error for the university to fail to provide Prescott with the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses at a live hearing in this matter, was the error harmless?

IV. What effect, if any, does Senate Bill No. 493 have on the resolution of the issues presented in this case?

Last practice March 30th.

Rana Salem, Zoe Bays, Mackenzie Cowles

Whether the First Amendment protects an instructor’s in-class speech on a matter of public

concern by limiting a public college’s disciplinary power or whether academic speech is

categorically unprotected by the First Amendment as official duty speech under Garcetti?

Whether the government speech doctrine allows a public college to compel a professor to

communicate certain information endorsing a viewpoint in conflict with the professor’s

deeply held academic views or whether the well-established Pickering-Connick balancing

test should continue to apply in the academic setting?

Last practice April 10th.