In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Maryland v. Craig that the use of closed circuit television is constitutional, despite the Federal confrontation clause guaranteeing the defendant the right to meet witnesses face-to-face. The Court held that this right is not absolute and must give way in the face of public policy considerations and the necessities of the case. In this case, the public policy consideration at stake was the State's interest in the physical and psychological well-being of abused children who must testify in court. Other elements of confrontation, such as the oath, cross-examination, and observation of the witnesses' demeanor, sufficiently ensure that closed circuit television testimony is reliable and subject to rigorous adversarial testing. However, the Court specified a three-part test regarding the requisite finding of necessity for using closed circuit television.