Circuit Split Alerter

Whether majority-group plaintiffs bringing Title VII or analogous state discrimination claims must satisfy the heightened 'Background Circumstances Rule' as part of the prima-facie case.

Whether a district court may, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, allow a prisoner to add new claims to a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion without prior appellate certification.

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is categorically constitutional for all felons under the Second Amendment after N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, or whether courts must conduct an as-applied, predicate-offense-specific historical-tradition analysis.

Proper methodology for determining a “reasonable” attorneys’ fee under federal fee-shifting statutes such as the FLSA—pure lodestar calculation versus the Fifth Circuit’s Johnson twelve-factor analysis.

Whether an ERISA plan administrator’s untimely decision on an internal appeal eliminates deferential (abuse-of-discretion) judicial review and requires a court to apply de-novo review of the benefit claim.

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) requires the Government to prove that the defendant knew the victim was a minor.

Whether, in prosecutions of physicians under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the government must prove that the doctor subjectively knew or intended that the prescriptions were unauthorized (subjective scienter) or whether it is sufficient to show the prescriptions were objectively outside the course of professional practice (objective standard).

Whether a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump-stock qualifies as a “machinegun” under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b).

Whether a defendant waives full appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence by failing to renew a Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal after the defense case when the district court has reserved decision on the mid-trial motion.

Whether a defendant alleging unconstitutional pre-indictment delay must prove that the Government intentionally delayed the indictment to gain a tactical advantage (bad-faith/intent requirement).

What standard of judicial review applies to benefit denials under the Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Change of Control Severance Plan—abuse-of-discretion or de novo?

Whether an adverse medical-treatment decision (or decision to withhold treatment) can constitute actionable disability discrimination under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and § 1557 of the ACA when the decision is based solely on the patient's disability.

Whether a public employee’s refusal to alter or retract a truthful statement made within the scope of his employment is protected citizen speech under the First Amendment.

Which party bears the burden of proof at a Remmer hearing when jurors were exposed to an external influence—the defendant (must show actual prejudice) or the government (must show the error was harmless)?

Whether a health-care professional submitting claims to a private health-insurance company occupies a "position of trust" under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3, such that the two-level abuse-of-trust enhancement may be applied.