Whether the dispute of sincerely held religious beliefs should be evaluated under a Totality of Circumstances test that resolves the dispute, not by inquiring into the extent of adherence to religious doctrine but by resolving the disputed facts in favor of sincerity?

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal for an employer “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individuals:|: * =!=religion. ” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l). “Religion ” includes “all aspects of religious observance and practice ” unless “an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate ” a religious observance or practice “without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer ’s business. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(j). The questions presented are: 1. Whether the dispute of sincerely held religious beliefs should be evaluated under a Totality of Circumstances test that resolves the dispute, not by inquiring into the extent of adherence to religious doctrine but by resolving the disputed facts in favor of sincerity? 2. Whether lack of due diligence in the accommodation process resulting in unsubstantiated claims of undue hardship is a violation for purposes of a Title VII religious discrimination claim? 3. If a neutral regulation of general applicability is applied and at any time during the same, a formal mechanism for granting medical and/ or religious exemptions was available was the general applicability standard violated? 4. Whether a compelling interest can survive strict scrutiny when sincerely held religious beliefs are substantially burdened and less restrictive means to further that interest are available and not permitted to be used?