1. Should a court of appeals recall its mandate to revisit the merits of
its prior decision where a petitioner's recall motion demonstrates a
credible showing of actual innocence and a federal constitutional
violation resulting in the conviction and incarceration of an innocent
person but without satisfying the statutory terms in 28 U.S.C.
§2255(h) or §2244(b) for a second or successive habeas petition?

2. Should the miscarriage of justice exception that had applied to
abusive or successive habeas petitions prior to AEDPA apply to 28
U.S.C. §2255(h) or §2244(b) for a second or successive habeas
petition following AEDPA's enactment so that a court of appeals
can recall its mandate to revisit the merits of its prior decision where
a petitioner's recall motion demonstrates a credible showing of
actual innocence and a federal constitutional violation resulting in
the conviction and incarceration of an innocent person but without
satisfying the statutory terms in 28 U.S.C. §2255(h) or §2244(b) for
a second or successive habeas petition?

Whether a court of appeals can recall its mandate to revisit the merits of a prior decision when a petitioner demonstrates actual innocence and a federal constitutional violation without satisfying statutory requirements for a second or successive habeas petition