Whether "the remedy by motion " authorized by 28 U.S.C. §2255(h)(2) is rendered
"inadequate or ineffective " under §2255(e) when a federal appellate court makes
the primary criterion for authorizing a second §2255 petition the federal
prosecutor 's consent to it?

Whether a Circuit Court of Appeals requirement that a prisoner asking to file a
second §2255 petition must show a new rule of Constitutional law is sufficient to
provide relief exceeds the gatekeeping role Congress intended in §2255(h)(2)?

Whether the remedy by motion authorized by 28 U.S.C. §2255(h)(2) is rendered inadequate or ineffective