1. Whether a defendant's guilty plea entered before Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2020), in which the defendant was not advised of the essential elements of the crime with which he was charged, constitutes a due process violation requiring vacatur of the guilty plea?

2. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(2)(A) is unconstitutional facially and as applied to the purely intrastate conduct of possessing a firearm within a school zone, because the statute suffers from the same infirmities that led the Court to strike down the earlier version of the statute in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995)?

3. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) exceeds Congress's Commerce Clause power, facially and as applied to the purely intrastate conduct of possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon, where the only connection to interstate commerce occurred before the defendant's possession?

Whether a defendant's guilty plea entered before Rehaif v. United States constitutes a due-process-violation