1. Did Petitioner's arrest and subsequent detention based on her speech violate her clearly established rights as set forth in Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969), Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003), NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982), and Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), such that the arresting officers do not enjoy qualified immunity?

2. Is the City liable under Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), for Thames's arrest and subsequent detention for allegedly mentioning bombs outside a facility that performs abortions—a decision which was authorized by City policy and ratified by its Chief of Police and the City's designated Rule 30(b)(6) witness?

Did Petitioner's arrest and subsequent detention based on her speech violate her clearly established rights as set forth in Watts v. United States, Virginia v. Black, NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., and Brandenburg v. Ohio, such that the arresting officers do not enjoy qualified immunity?