Whether Sec. 924(c) contains a specific mens rea requirement

QUESTION PRESENTED To decide whether a firearm is possessed “in furtherance of” a drug trafficking crime, the Fifth Circuit utilizes a non-exhaustive list of factors found in the case of United States v. Ceballos-Torres. However, other circuits have adopted this test with qualification. In particular, the Seventh Circuit, in United States v. Castillo, questioned whether the Ceballos-Torres factors, standing alone, adequately address the issue of mens rea required by 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). And in this Court’s recent decision in Rosemond v. United States, it specifically left open the question of whether one intends to aid and abet a Sec. 924(c) offense when one aids and abets a drug trafficking offense. Because the Fifth Circuit’s decision below rules that, a fortiori, one will have the mens rea to commit a Sec. 924(c) offense if one party to an offense, unbeknownst to the other, possesses a firearm, this Court should review to answer the following question: 1. Whether Sec. 924(c) contains a specific mens rea requirement that requires one to know more than that firearms are “tools of the trade” for drug trafficking crimes and should therefore reasonably anticipate that any confederate in a drug trafficking crime will be armed sufficient to justify conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). I