Whether Appellant presented a justiciable issue, where the choice of the Virginia Governor and the State Health Commissioner, failed to represent "a reasonable accommodation of conflicting policies that were committed to the agency's care by the statute," so that a reviewing court "should. . . disturb it. . . [when] it appears from the statute or its legislative history that the accommodation is not one that Congress would have sanctioned." Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837, 104 S.Ct. 2778. 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) (citation omitted)

Whether the Reviewing Court erred, where Appellant presented a justiciable issue "limited to 'the grounds that the agency invoked when it took the action'", DHS v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. (2020) (quoting from Michigan v. EPA, 576 U. S. 743 (2015).

Whether Appellant presented a justiciable issue, where, a regulation, "purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals, or the public safety has no real or substantial relation to those objects, or is, beyond all question, a plain, palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, [an

Whether the President's interest in confidentiality can be overcome by a FOIA request