Whethe r a district court 's discretion to limit the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses is as broad as the general discr etion to limit evid ence under Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evid ence and includes forcing the d efendant to put on alternative evidence as part of an affirmative case rather than confront the witness called by the government? The court below upheld a ban on acknowledged core Sixth Amendme nt cross -examination of a case investigator concerning evi dence of another theory of the murder in question on t he basis of the district court 's discretion under Rule 403 and a determination that the defendant could seek to elicit relevant evidence affirmatively rather than b y confronting the witness called by the government . While the court 's decision consistent with other courts of appeal that regard Rule 403 balancing as determinative of confrontation issues, other court s of appeal emp hatically reject this con clusion and hold that Sixth Amendment confrontation issues must be determined independently.

Whether a district court's discretion to limit the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses is as broad as the general discretion to limit evidence under Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and includes forcing the defendant to put on alternative evidence as part of an affirmative case rather than confront the witness called by the government?