Whether the Sixth Circuit erred by expanding the scope of the 'relating to' language in 18 U.S.C. §2252A(b)(2) to include conduct under a state statute that does not fall within the generic offense of sexual abuse?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) and § 2252A(b)(2), possession of an image of child pornography of a prepubescent minor or a minor who had not attained 12 years of age ordinarily carries a penalty of not more than 20 years imprisonment. Section 2252A(b)(2), however, provides in relevant part that a if such person has a prior conviction ... under the laws of any State relating to aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward, or the production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment, or transportation of child pornography, such person shall be ... imprisoned for not less than 10 years nor more than 20 years. ; This case involves the proper interpretation and scope of the “relating to” , language in §2252A(b)(2). The Sixth Circuit has given that statutory language such an expansive reading that it encompasses conduct under a state statute that does not meet the generic offense of sexual abuse. The questions presented are: I. Whether the Sixth Circuit erred by expanding the scope of the . “relating to” language in 18 U.S.C. §2252A(b)(2) to include conduct under a state statute that does not fall within the generic offense of sexual abuse? Il. Whether a 10-year mandatory minimum. sentence that is triggered by an inchoate misdemeanor conviction constitutes , cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment? i 4 a ;