Whether the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment requires public universities to allow accused students a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine adverse witnesses when credibility is central to the outcome, and whether federal circuit courts are split on the proper application of the forfeiture doctrine

1. ) Does the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment require public universities to allow accused students a meaningful opportunity to cross examine adverse witnesses when the credibility is central to the outcome, as held by Sixth Circuit, or may universities deny that opportunity to cross examine without violating due process, as held by Third Circuit in this case at hand? 2. ) Are the federal circuit courts split on the proper application of the forfeiture doctrine, with some circuits (including 3rd circuit) strictly barring appellate review of improperly preserved constitutional issues, but other circuits allowing flexibility when fundamental rights, constitutional issues and/or plain error are involved? 3. ) Does the strict application of the forfeiture doctrine by 3rd Circuit in this case at hand, where 3rd circuit completely barred issues regarding constitutional issues and fundamental rights raised on appeal because the issues were not clearly stated at district court level, conflict with other circuits that allow review of constitutional arguments on appeal that weren ’t perfectly preserved? 4. ) Does the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment require appellate courts to review the denial of judicial recusal where a judge granted summary judgment in favor of a party with whom the judge has a close personal connection, and where other circuits would have required recusal and/or vacated the judgment under similar circumstances? 5. ) In cases where the judge ’s failure to recuse himself from a case involving a party which he has substantial ongoing ties to, which violates 28 U.S.C 455(a) and litigants 14th Amendment Due Process rights, are circuit courts required to bypass forfeiture doctrine and impose sanctions when brought to circuit court ’s attention, like many circuits do, or Williams 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES are they allowed to ignore the judicial misconduct by strictly applying forfeiture doctrine like 3rd Circuit did in their decision on the case at hand?