Question 1:

Does Jacobson v. Massachusetts , 197 U.S. 11 (1905) limit a court's review of government-mandated investigational medical treatments to whether the mandate is rationally related to a legitimate government objective, or does Jacobson first require the court to determine if the scope and means of the mandate constitute a legitimate exercise of the police power of the state that does not infringe upon the federal domain?

Question 2:

Did the Ninth Circuit violate the principle of party presentation by sua sponte deciding a major constitutional question — whether Jacobson forecloses any substantive due process right to refuse an investigational drug — based on facts neither raised, briefed, nor argued by any party, to affirm dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)?

Whether Jacobson v. Massachusetts limits judicial review of government-mandated investigational medical treatments to rational basis review or requires courts to first determine if the mandate constitutes a legitimate exercise of state police power, and whether the Ninth Circuit violated the principle of party presentation by sua sponte deciding a major constitutional question based on facts neither raised, briefed, nor argued by any party