Whether the Fourth Circuit's application of an evidentiary standard for proving racial discrimination against an Asian American plaintiff conflicts with Supreme Court precedent and creates an inter-circuit split

1. Whether the Fourth Circuit ’s application of a heightened and unprecedented evidentiary standard for proving racial discrimination against an Asian American plaintiff creates an irreconcilable conflict with this Court ’s precedents in St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks and Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., and with the principles recently affirmed in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. 2. Whether the Fourth Circuit ’s decision, by effectively immunizing an employer from liability for a pattern of mendacity and shifting justifications, creates a deepening inter-circuit split regarding the proper legal standard for evaluating evidence of pretext and discrimination against Asian American plaintiffs. 3. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in applying the McDonnell Douglas framework at summary judgment by requiring an Asian American plaintiff to prove pretext by a preponderance of the evidence, instead of merely raising a genuine dispute of material fact as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.