The agenda item is broadly stated, so you're right - it likely included (but probably isn't limited to) the civil case of Tucker v State of Idaho
, a longstanding case about funding adequacy for the state's PD system, to which the PDC is a legally necessary party. The claim by the ACLU is that underfunding is so severe that proper defense is impossible, and this denies all the agency's clients their rights to a defense under the US Constitution.
Only the Idaho legislature can increase funding, and I don't see that happening during BK's case. Makes me wonder if this will be among his appealable issues. It certainly dwarfs the COI concern. MOO.