Whether a state may compel secular therapy while refusing to credit an equivalent faith-based program under the Free Exercise Clause and Due Process

1. Whether, consistent with the Free Exercise clause (App. B-l) and Due Process (App. B-3, B-4) (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments), a State may compel secular therapy while refusing to credit an equivalent faith-based program. 2. Whether a state court may deny a probationer religious therapy for nearly a decade despite sincerely held beliefs and eventual probation approval. 3. Whether reliance on internal probation rules —and assumptions that religious treatment is inherently insufficient —instead of statutory authority violates constitutional guarantees of religious liberty (App. B-l) and due process (App. B-3, B-4). 4. Whether a State may invoke “separation of church and state ” or funding restrictions to deny credit or vouchers for religious therapy when federal law places faith-based providers on equal footing with secular programs. 5. Whether the summary, cursory denials by the Superior Court and Court of Appeals —grounded in internal policy rather than law; while systematically ignoring A.R.S. § 13-90 1(E) —(See App. B-6) and ignoring a completed, probation-approved religious program —constitute an abuse of discretion and a continuing denial of First Amendment Rights, (App. B-l) when these Orders Denying Relief were filed within two days 1 of Petitioner ’s filing; compounding the Free Exercise (App. B-l) and Due Process violations (App. B-3, B-4) and whether prolonged denial of religious therapy requires immediate termination of probation as an appropriate remedy. 6. Whether this Petition should properly also be called a Petition for Redress of Grievances (App. B-2) for wrongs committed under the constitutional First Amendment (App. B-l) by the State of Arizona and the Adult Probation Department in Maricopa County against Petitioner. 2