1. Should this Court summarily reverse and remand
this case to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Fourth Circuit for the same reason it did
so on January 13, 2025, in Santana v. Garland ,
No. 24-46 : "the case is remanded to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
for further consideration in light of Loper Light
Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U. S. 369 (2024)."
In its August 4,, 2025, Opinion the 4th Circuit does
not mention Loper , even though the appellant
squarely presented Loper in its appeal: "The
panel decision of August 4, 2025, is contrary to
Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo , 144 S. Ct.
2244, 2261 (2024) (overruling Chevron and holding
that 'courts, not agencies, will decide 'all relevant
questions of law' arising on review of agency
action . . . even those involving ambiguous laws').
Instead of "decid[ing] 'all relevant questions
of law' arising on review of agency action" in
the face of an at best ambiguous provision the
CARES Act, the panel deferred to the District
Court, which had in turn deferred to the SBA,
on four questions of law presented by appellant
Pacem Solution International, LLC. The Court
of Appeals denied rehearing on September 30,
2025, without an opinion.

2. Now that " Chevron deference" has been
overruled, should this Court direct lower courts
to utilize the final article of the Bill of Rights
for the purpose explained in the Preamble
to the Bill of Rights -- "in order to prevent
misconstructions" -- as an interpretive rule to
construe ambiguities against the proffering
party, i.e., against Congress. Cf. Loper , 144 S. Ct.
at 2286, n. 5 (Gorsuch, J., concurring) (" Chevron
deference sits in tension with many traditional
legal presumptions and interpretive principles,
representing nearly the inverse of . . . contra
preferentem ."). A Tenth Amendment rule of
construction would provide a practical safeguard
against federal encroachments on powers that
neither the States nor the People have ever
delegated to the national government. See New
York v. United States , 505 U.S. 144, 157 (1992)
("The question is not what power the Federal
Government ought to have but what powers in
fact have been given by the people." (internal
citation omitted)); United States v. Heth , 7 U.S. (3
Cranch) 399, 413 (1806) (Paterson, J.) ("words of
a statute, if dubious, ought in cases of the present
kind to be taken most strongly against the law
makers").

3. Should this Court vacate the August 4, 2025,
opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit, and resolve the following four
legal issues ignored by the

Whether the Supreme Court should summarily reverse and remand a Fourth Circuit case in light of Loper Bright Enterprises and Chevron deference overruling