Whether the Eleventh Circuit exceeded its statutory mandate under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(C) when it issued published rulings on the merits of open legal questions and treated those rulings as binding precedent in later appeals

question presented here is presented in at least three other cases pending before this Court. Gonzalez v. United States, Case No. 18-7575; Williams v. United States, Case No. 18-6172; St. Hubert v. United States, Case No. 19-5267. But the first, statutory question is presented only here. As explained below, this case is an excellent vehicle for resolving this issue for at least two reasons. First, this petition allows the Court to dispose of this issue on statutory grounds, thereby avoiding the thorny Due Process issue. See Escambia County v. McMillan, 466 U.S. 48, 51 (1984) (“It is a well established principle governing the prudent exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction that normally the Court will not decide a constitutional question if there is some other ground upon which to dispose of the case.”). And second, there is a circuit split on the merits of Mr. Robinson’s claim, meaning the Court’s resolution of this issue may lead to Mr. Robinson obtaining meaningful relief. ii