Whether the 'professional judgment standard' articulated in Youngberg can be reduced to 'whether the worst doctor in America would say ok'

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This petition poses two questions: first, whether the “professional judgment standard” this court articulated in Youngberg can be reduced to “whether the worst doctor in America would say ok”?; second, whether state defendants can be immune from suit for civil rights violations when the plaintiff knows a state defendant violated his civil rights, but not which one amongst several implicated by the evidence? Both questions split the Circuits. Both questions involve issues of nationwide scope and exceptional importance to one of the most vulnerable populations in the country — the state institutionalized mentally ill. 1. Is the “professional judgment” standard articulated by this Court in Youngberg v. Romeo governing medical care of the institutionalized mentally ill indistinguishable from the deliberate indifference standard governing medical care of convicted criminals to such a degree that even gross negligence or criminal recklessness is consistent with the exercise of “professional judgment”? 2. When evidence points to several possible different suspects for civil rights violations, does the fact of several different suspects preclude a plaintiff from asking the jury to determine which one is responsible?