Circuit Split Alerter

Whether a ‘lone-wolf’ bomb attack carried out after watching ISIS propaganda constitutes providing or attempting to provide “material support or resources” in the form of “personnel” or a “service” under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B when the attacker had no bilateral contact with the terrorist organization.

Whether the Ex parte Young exception to state sovereign immunity permits suits against state officials that in substance seek specific performance of a contract to which the State is a party.

Whether the Administrative Procedure Act’s “final agency action” requirement is a jurisdictional limitation on the federal courts’ subject-matter jurisdiction (as the Eleventh Circuit holds) or merely a non-jurisdictional element of a cause of action (as the D.C. Circuit holds).

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(2) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act allows a district court to issue successive (renewed) preliminary injunctions beyond the statute’s 90-day limit without converting the relief into final prospective relief.

Whether employer incentive/retention bonus programs like Merrill Lynch's WealthChoice Awards qualify as an "employee pension benefit plan" under ERISA or are exempt bonus plans under 29 C.F.R. § 2510.3-2(c).

Whether police may, consistent with the Fourth Amendment, automatically inquire about the presence of weapons during any traffic stop (a per-se officer-safety rule) or may do so only when the totality of circumstances creates a reasonable officer-safety concern and the inquiry does not prolong the stop.

Whether off-site repair facilities and equipment that are merely connected to extraction operations, but are not located on or immediately adjacent to an extraction site or coal-processing plant, are “mines” within the meaning of 30 U.S.C. § 802(h)(1)(C) and therefore subject to MSHA jurisdiction.

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1965(b) (or another subsection of § 1965) authorizes nationwide service of process—and hence nationwide personal jurisdiction—in civil RICO actions.

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1505’s phrase “any pending proceeding … being had before any department or agency” encompasses an agency’s post-adjudication enforcement action, such as ICE’s execution of a final immigration-court removal order.

Whether an inmate alleging First-Amendment retaliation based on the threatened loss (or loss) of a prison job must plead or prove specific facts about the job’s nature and value to show an adverse action that would chill a person of ordinary firmness.

Whether expedited-removal proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1228(b) provide a meaningful administrative vehicle for a non-citizen to challenge the legal basis of removability, such that the exhaustion requirement in § 1326(d)(1) can or cannot be satisfied.

Whether state statutes regulating manufacturers’ distribution of 340B drugs are pre-empted by the federal 340B statutory scheme.

Whether 49 U.S.C. § 46110’s grant of exclusive circuit-court review over TSA No-Fly-List orders divests district courts of jurisdiction to hear challenges to Terrorist Watchlist placements when a concurrent TSA final order is in effect.

Whether a drug-detection dog sniff at the doorway of a dwelling (apartment or motel room) constitutes a Fourth-Amendment "search" because it intrudes on a reasonable expectation of privacy inside the residence.

Proper standard of review (de novo vs. abuse-of-discretion) for a district court’s application of the equitable-mootness doctrine in bankruptcy appeals.