California courts are putting California colleges on notice. Recently, there have been five CA appeals court decisions in favor of accused males, and colleges must require hearings and cross examination, or else…’We hold that when a student accused of sexual misconduct faces severe disciplinary sanctions, and the credibility of witnesses (whether the accusing student, other witnesses, or both) is central to the adjudication of the allegation, fundamental fairness requires, at a minimum, that the university provide a mechanism by which the accused may cross–examine those witnesses, directly or indirectly, at a hearing in which the witnesses appear in person or by other means (e.g., videoconferencing) before a neutral adjudicator with the power independently to find facts and make credibility assessments. That factfinder cannot be a single individual with the divided and inconsistent roles occupied by the Title IX investigator in the USC system. ‘
Conclusion: ‘Subject to argument as to mootness, the petition is GRANTED. The court will issue a writ directing Respondents to set aside the administrative decision and the sanction of expulsion. Should Respondents elect to initiate new administrative proceedings against Petitioner, they shall do so in a manner consistent with a fair procedure and the views expressed herein.’ Excerpts from Judge Mary H. Strobel. Read the full ruling: Doe v White CSU Northridge
