Plaintiff is a female Speech-Language Specialist (SPS) who worked at a private elementary school in State X. The private elementary school complied with State X laws and received some funding through a State X voucher program. State X requires any SPS who provides services to students in private or public schools to obtain a state certification from the State X Department of Education (Department). Plaintiff received their certification before working at the private school. Plaintiff also provided speech-language services after school hours to clients.

A State X statute gave the Department the authority to suspend or revoke state certifications for unprofessional conduct, which included waiving fees for services rendered in exchange for referrals or services. A Department investigator received an email stating that Plaintiff was providing services to a physical therapist's child after school and waived their service fees in exchange for referrals. Plaintiff provided services at the physical therapist's home. The investigator decided to look into the matter. They went to the physical therapist's home after school to see if Plaintiff was there providing services. The investigator snuck up to the house, looked through the window, and saw Plaintiff providing services to a child. The investigator hid when Plaintiff left and then knocked on the door to interview the physical therapist. The physical therapist declined to answer any questions. The investigator warned the physical therapist not to tell Plaintiff about the Department's investigation and falsely said that doing so would be a crime. The next day, the investigator went to the private school and demanded that Plaintiff stop providing services to a student so that the investigator could interview Plaintiff right away. When the plaintiff declined, the investigator yelled at the Plaintiff and threatened to revoke the Plaintiff's certification on the spot if the plaintiff did not comply. Plaintiff agreed and told the investigator that they were not waiving referral fees. Instead, they were providing services in exchange for the physical therapist providing services to Plaintiff's mother.

The investigator filed a report with the Department recommending revocation of Plaintiff's certification. The Department sent Plaintiff a notice with the charge of unprofessional conduct for waiving fees in exchange for referrals or services, a hearing date, the potential penalty of suspension or revocation of certification, and a statement that Plaintiff could appear at the hearing and contest the charges. Upon hearing about the professional misconduct charge by the Department, the private school terminated Plaintiff's employment without a hearing.

Plaintiff appeared at the hearing with an attorney. At the hearing, a Department representative presented the investigator's report as evidence and stated that the Department agreed with the recommendation to revoke Plaintiff's certification. Plaintiff was then permitted to address the charges. State X law permitted Plaintiff's attorney to assist the plaintiff but not represent them at the hearing, which meant that the attorney could not speak or examine witnesses; they could only assist the plaintiff in doing so. The plaintiff asked to cross-examine the investigator, but the hearing officer denied that request. Plaintiff then testified that bartering for services was common amongst health service providers, and they were aware of numerous speech-language specialists who bartered their services in some way. Plaintiff asked to call some of these physical therapists as witnesses. The hearing officer denied the request. The hearing officer subsequently revoked the teacher's certification for unprofessional conduct.

Analyze Plaintiff's potential constitutional claims and whether they are likely to be successful based on the relevant legal standards and facts.