1. Whether the substantive due process right to bodily integrity should be extended to protect the public at large from exposure to an environmental toxin resulting from governmental policy decisions.

2. Whether it is plausible that a municipal officer's actions were conscience-shocking where the Respondents admit that the policy decisions were based on the advice and direction of the controlling State regulatory agency and with the advice of expert advisors.

3. If the answer to Questions 1 or 2 is "yes," was the right clearly established?

4. Whether the City, which was under the substantially complete control and authority of the State under Michigan's "Local Financial Stability and Choice Act of 2012," was an arm of the State and thus entitled to immunity from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.

Whether the substantive due process right to bodily integrity should be extended to protect the public at large from exposure to an environmental toxin resulting from governmental policy decisions