Whether proving a lack of general applicability under Employment Division v. Smith requires showing unfettered discretion or categorical exemptions for identical secular conduct

are: 1. Whether proving a lack of general applicability under Employment Division v. Smith requires showing unfettered discretion or categorical exemptions for identical secular conduct. ii 2. Whether Carson v. Makin displaces the rule of Employment Division v. Smith only when the government explicitly excludes religious people and institutions . 3. Whether Employment Division v. Smith should be overruled . iii RULE 29.6 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT No Petitioner has a parent corporation. No publicly held corporation owns any portion of any of the Petitioners, and none of the Petitioners is a subsidiary or an affiliate of any publicly owned corporation.