Was Stamper's conviction in contravention of multiple decisions of this Court, including Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) and United States v. X-Citement Video, 513 U.S. 64 (1994)

QUESTION PRESENTED The government convicted Edward Ronald Stamper of sexual abuse in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2)(B) based on a jury instruction which provided: In order for the Defendant to be found guilty of sexual abuse as charged in the Indictment, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: First, the Defendant is an Indian person; Second, the Defendant knowingly engaged in a sexual act with [K.]; Third, [K.] was physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in that sexual act; and Fourth, the crime occurred within the exterior boundaries of the Rocky Boy’s Indian Reservation. Was Stamper’s conviction in contravention of multiple decisions of this Court, including Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) and United States v. X-Citement Video, 513 U.S. 64 (1994), since his jury was instructed that the element of knowingly applied only to the otherwise legal act of having sex, and it was not required to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he knew K. was “physically incapable of declining participation in or communicating unwillingness to engage in [a] sexual acts?”