To Respondent Robin Shahar:
Whether the "some harm" standard articulated by
this Court in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis , 601 U.S.
346 (2024) applies to sexual harassment claims (both
tangible employment action and hostile work environment)
under the Equal Protection Clause to the United State
Constitution through 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq . ("Title VII") in analyzing whether an employee has
been subjected to both a hostile work environment and
tangible employment action sexual harassment.

To Respondent City of Atlanta:
Whether a municipality's mere adoption of a sexual
harassment policy shields it from 42 U.S.C. § 1983 liability
under this Court's precedents in Monell v. Department of
Social Services , 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978) and City of St.
Louis v. Praprotnik , 485 U.S. 112, 127 (1988) or whether
the municipality must also enforce and not intentionally
violate the policy to avoid liability.

To Respondent City of Atlanta:
Whether a charging party's correction of a technical
defect in a timely amendment to a charge of discrimination
relates back to the date of filing of the original charge.

To Respondent City of Atlanta:
Whether an employer may subject an employee to a
fit-for-duty exam not because it believes the exam is a
business necessity but to avoid liability for discrimination
under the ADA and to set an employee up for termination
in retaliation for engaging in protected conduct under
Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended
by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act
of 2008, 42 U.S.C. § 12112 et seq. ("ADA"), and the Family
and Medical Leave Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. ("FMLA").

To Respondent City of Atlanta:
Whether under Singleton v. Wulff , 428 U.S. 106,
120-21 (1976), because the proper resolution of the issue
relating to the waiver of attorney-client privilege on
certain emails withheld in this case is beyond doubt and
injustice would result from the withholding of the emails,
the circuit court should have addressed and resolved the
issue.

Whether the 'some harm' standard applies to sexual harassment claims under the Equal Protection Clause and Title VII