Is a state court's conclusion that evidence not presented at trial was cumulative of other evidence before the jury a "determination of the facts" that is reviewed for reasonableness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2), or an "application of clearly established Federal law" reviewed for reasonableness under § 2254(d)(1), an issue on which the circuit courts of appeal disagree?

Is a state court's conclusion that evidence not presented at trial was cumulative of other evidence before the jury a 'determination of the facts' that is reviewed for reasonableness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2), or an 'application of clearly established Federal law' reviewed for reasonableness under § 2254(d)(1), an issue on which the circuit courts of appeal disagree?