In the name of fairness, some of my hiring committee members have proposed that if any our candidates cannot attend in-person issues (for travel expense or visa issue), then we should use tele-interviews for all candidates. This includes those who are local.

Is this reasonable?

Previously, I would use in-person for as many persons as possible. If someone could not travel, we would try to replicate as much of the interview process as possible remotely: video connections, in-person sessions, a group presentation, etc.

I like having as much in-person engagement as possible, but certainly accept that there is a difference between in-person and remote. What is more important? The additional fairness of having all-remote interviews, or the additional information of having some (but not all) interviews in-person.