1.
Should the Court grant review to clarify that the guilty knowledge of
status element under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B), means knowledge that
one's legal status as a non-immigrant visa holder prohibits firearm
possession under Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019)?
A. Given the Statutory and Regulatory Exceptions Permitting Visa
Holders to Lawfully Possess Firearms, Must the Government's Proof
Requirement of Knowledge Extend to Showing Petitioner Knew his
Possession was Unlawful Despite Those Exceptions?
B. Are 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B) and attendant regulations
unconstitutionally vague on their face or as applied to petitioner
given that both laws permit visa holders to possess a firearm
under uncertain circumstances?
C. What is the plain error review standard -structural or
something less-- when the Rehaif knowledge element is
not only omitted from jury instructions, but the jury is
told that petitioner's knowledge of status is irrelevant?
2.
Does the Second Amendment right to possess a firearm in one's
home protect visa holders, making 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(b)
unconstitutional?

Should the Court grant review to clarify the guilty knowledge element under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B)