I. Did the inferior courts err: 1) by failing to
apply, or 2) by misapplying, settled Article
III standing rules to factual jurisdictional
objections allowing expansion of the record?

II. Is a use or disclosure "order of a court of
competent jurisdiction granted after
application showing good cause " (42 U.S.C. §
290dd-2(b)(2)(C)), a prerequisite to suit; and,
does its absence debar prosecution under 28
U.S.C. § 547(1)?

III. The Defendant is a beneficiary of the
Confidentiality of records statute (42 U.S.C.
§ 290dd-2); and, its rules (42 C.F.R. Part 2).
Does compelled disclosure or use of
sensitive, substance use disorder records,
withstand exacting scrutiny in this case?

Did the inferior courts err in applying Article III standing rules to jurisdictional objections and in interpreting the prerequisites for disclosure of substance use disorder records?