(1) Did the Second Circuit err in finding that petitioner lacked standing to challenge a criminal statute under the threat of prosecution doctrine, where petitioner openly expressed his intention to violate, for religious purposes, a criminal statute which the government has openly declared its intent to enforce.

(2) How are courts to determine whether a particular religious belief/practice qualifies for protection under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and by extension, the First Amendment —an issue dealt with differently by different circuits.

Did the Second Circuit err in finding that petitioner lacked standing to challenge a criminal statute under the threat of prosecution doctrine