One's interpretation of the Constitution's requirement of due process in nonjudicial proceedings, like university disciplinary actions, can vary widely. Only recently have schools adopted regulations that try and resemble due process, so the issue continues to occupy a contentious gray area.

One might claim that everyone is entitled to a fair and impartial process, but what qualifies as just and objective can be debated. For example, the rape shield law makes it difficult to introduce an accuser's sexual history as a way to cast doubt on their integrity and reliability. Perhaps the accused has the right to question their accuser, but those rights, whether at school or in a formal court of law, appear limited.

As the requirement to incorporate due process remains unclear, it's possible to reply that Title 9 is of greater relevance. Many college students—accusers and accused—have used the law and its injunction against sexual discrimination and sexual violence at federally funded universities to seek redress. Several male students have successfully invoked Title 9 to combat investigations and rulings that supposedly unfolded with bias. Female students, too, have successfully utilized Title 9.