1. May the offense of conspiracy to distribute or possess with intent to distribute controlled substances while on a United States aircraft, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 959(c), be prosecuted extraterritorially, resolving a direct circuit split between United States v. Epskamp, 832 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2016) and United States v. Thompson, 921 F.3d 263 (D.C. Cir. 2019)?

2. Did the government's handling of Landji's attorney-client privileged documents violate his rights under the Sixth Amendment as delineated by Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972) and its progeny?

3. Were Landji's Confrontation Clause rights under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) and its progeny, violated when a cell phone data extraction report was admitted via the testimony of an analyst other than the one who conducted the extraction?

May the offense of conspiracy to distribute or possess with intent to distribute controlled substances while on a United States aircraft, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 959(c), be prosecuted extraterritorially, resolving a direct circuit split?