Anonymous accusations are easy to abuse. They should be treated with a skeptical eye regardless of the context. Any institution that makes decisions on such accusations is going to be rife with petty, vindictive politics.
Whenever an institution makes the decision to start taking anonymous accusations seriously, you can bet the bureaucracy of that institution has already been captured by precisely the sort of people who are eager to abuse such a system. To anybody else without such a malicious intent, the hazards of anonymous accusations should be obvious.
Be very careful when seeking to reform such a system, because those you are trying to disarm will use those very same bureaucratic weapons to stop you.
The original post wasn't saying that the bill of rights binds the behavior of this school in this case, but pointing out that the reason that's protected as a fundamental right in our constitution is that, given cover of anonymity, accusations are highly weaponizable—that's the reason that's included as a fundamental, enumerated right—which fact will apply to most any institution, whether or not it's legally required to allow one to face one's accuser.
Yes. It is important to remain cautious of anonymous accusations since they can pave the way for the implementation of algorithmic prosecution or a zero tolerance policy.
Be very careful when seeking to reform such a system, because those you are trying to disarm will use those very same bureaucratic weapons to stop you.