Does the Constitution permit Congress to enact 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E) to divest this Court of its authority, recognized by Tyler v. Cain, to determine what opinions are subject to retroactive application?

question presented to this Court is Farris Morris entitled to a merits hearing— for the first time—on his claim that the complete exclusion of black jurors from his capital jury violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the Constitution permit Congress to enact 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E) to divest this Court of its authority, recognized by Tyler v. Cain, to determine what opinions are subject to retroactive application? 2. Should Foster v. Chatman be applied retroactively to protect the rights of a petitioner who makes a prima facie case that the trial prosecutor’s decision to seat an all-white jury in a one-third African-American county was “motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent?” 3If Foster v. Chatman established a new rule of law, subject to retroactive application, then the finding that he had previously raised a Batson claim would not be dispositive. ii