When a prisoner has made a substantial showing of factual innocence -as in this case where the firearms Petitioner purportedly possessed in the furtherance of a drug trafficking crime had been previously seized and were in the custody of local law enforcement authorities at the time the government alleges Petitioner committed the act -- does a district court err when it holds that the broad jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 does not grant it the authority to review the merits of the case?

Is a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of a prisoner's conviction or sentence when a lay prisoner -- a construction worker by trade -- eventually obtains evidence demonstrating his factual innocence but not in time to meet the strict AntiTerrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's statute of limitation in § 2255(f), in such a way that it permits such a prisoner to file for habeas relief through H 2255(e) and 2241 under the savings clause?

When a prisoner has made a substantial showing of factual innocence, does a district court err when it holds that the broad jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 does not grant it the authority to review the merits of the case?