Whether a district court may consider changes in sentencing law as a possible 'extraordinary and compelling' reason warranting a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)

QUESTION PRESENTED Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)@), a district court may “reduce [a] term of imprisonment” upon “motion of the defendant” if it finds that “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction.” Separately, 28 U.S.C. § 994(t) provides that “[r]ehabilitation of the defendant alone shall not be considered an extraordinary and compelling reason.” No other statutory or Sentencing Guideline provision states, specifies, or cabins what constitutes an “extraordinary and compelling” reason. Both this Court and Congress have, further, recognized the “longstanding principle that sentencing courts have broad discretion to consider various kinds of information” when imposing a punishment. Pepper v. United States, 562 U.S. 476, 488 (2011) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3661). Given the foregoing, may a district court consider— among other factors and on an individual, case-by-case changes in sentencing law as a possible “extraordinary and compelling” reason warranting a sentence reduction? (i)