Should the Court grant review to clarify the guilty knowledge element under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should the Court grant review to clarify that the guilty knowledge of status element under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B), means knowledge that one’s legal status as a non-immigrant visa holder prohibits firearm possession under Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019)? A. Given the Statutory and Regulatory Exceptions Permitting Visa Holders to Lawfully Possess Firearms, Must the Government's Proof Requirement of Knowledge Extend to Showing Petitioner Knew his Possession was Unlawful Despite Those Exceptions? B. Are 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(B) and attendant regulations unconstitutionally vague on their face or as applied to petitioner given that both laws permit visa holders to possess a firearm under uncertain circumstances? C. What is the plain error review standard —structural or something less-when the Rehaif knowledge element is not only omitted from jury instructions, but the jury is told that petitioner’s knowledge of status is irrelevant? 2. Does the Second Amendment right to possess a firearm in one’s home protect visa holders, making 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(b) unconstitutional? i