Terry Lee Hinds v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al.

Whether the 1976 amendment to 5 U.S.C. § 702 provides a standalone or categorical waiver of sovereign immunity for all actions seeking non-monetary relief—as held by the D.C., Second, Third, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits—or whether that waiver is identified as adhering to a “narrow waiver” view conditioned upon the “agency action” and “finality” requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 704, as held by the First, Fourth, and Federal Circuits?

Whether the Federal Sovereign Immunity Doctrine, Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a), or the Administrative Procedure Act’s finality requirement, 5 U.S.C. § 704, bars a federal court from exercising jurisdiction over a pre-enforcement religious challenge to an agency mandate that forces a party to choose between violating sincerely held religious beliefs or incurring significant financial penalties for non-compliance as a “substantial burden” under RFRA?

Whether a Court of Appeals abdicates its “independent judgment” duty under Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) and the “shall” mandate in 5 U.S.C. § 706 when it employs “Black Box” (8th Cir. R. 47B) summary procedures to bypass de novo review of novel questions or determination of a statute’s best reading of 44 U.S.C. §§ 3501-3521 (“PRA”) & federal sovereign immunity waivers under 0 U.S.C. § 702, particularly where those laws intersect with the First Amendment and RFRA?