Whether the right recognized in Johnson applies to the identical residual clause in the mandatory Guidelines

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ON REVIEW Before 2005, when the Sentencing Guidelines were mandatory, the petitioners were sentenced as career offenders under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 based on prior convictions that qualified as crimes of violence only under the residual clause in § 4B1.2(a)(2). In 2015, this Court struck down as void for vagueness the identical residual clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act’s definition of “violent felony” at 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Within a year, each of the petitioners filed a § 2255 motion challenging their career offender sentences in light of the new rule announced in Johnson. Each of the motions was denied as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), and the Ninth Circuit affirmed based on its decision in Blackstone v. United States, 903 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2018), in which it held that the new right announced in Johnson does not apply to the mandatory Guidelines unless and until this Court says so. The questions presented are: Lk Whether, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), the right initially recognized in Johnson applies to the identical residual clause in the mandatory Guidelines, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2? Il. Whether the residual clause in the mandatory guidelines is void for vagueness? i