a) Whether a jail facility's ban on the hijab or religious head scarf worn for religious reasons, was the least restrictive means of ensuring effective prison administration and security; b) Whether, particularly in light of the intervening decision in Holt v. Hobbs, 135 S. Ct. 853 (2015), the lower court afforded improper due deference to Respondent under RLUIPA, 42 U.S.C. 2000cc-l(a), since many of the factual assertions was grossly exaggerated in dismissing Petitioner's hijab case; c) Whether correctional officers should discard inmate's Quran and prayer mat.

Whether the 9th Circuit's decision on Americans with Disabilities Act conflicted the Supreme Court's decision regarding the due process in denying access to an inmate with severe food allergies' to enrollment in an institutional program.

a) Whether Scott v. Harris is applicable in a video evidence where the party who presented the video evidence's own key witness testimony contradicts the video evidence and confirms the victims version of events; b)Whether the Eighth Amendment allow correctional officer to use excessive force to remove handcuffs on an inmate who poses no threat and is locked behind a heavy metal door.

Whether a jail facility's ban on the hijab or religious head scarf worn for religious reasons was the least restrictive means of ensuring effective prison administration and security