Does the fifth amendment's due process and equal protection rights guard against disparate sentences created by the Methamphetamine Drug Table under USSG §2D1.1

QUESTION PRESENTED Claim #1 Does the fifth amendment’s due process and equal protection rights guard against disparate sentences created by the Methamphetamine Drug Table under USSG §2D1.1, treating similarly situated defendants differently by compounding drug responsibility for "actual" methamphetamine by a 10:1 ratio, when there is no longer a rational _ basis to justify such a difference given that per the government statistics all methamphetamine has been deemed above the USSG 80% purity level since 2012? a. Does changing the legal basis on appeal for a claim of err make it unpreserved under FRCrP 51(b)? Claim #2 Does the District Court’s Statement that, “[w]ell, I believe it is my obligation to follow the sentencing guidelines as they are set forth...” in response to Counsel’s argument that the Court had the power to deviate from the Methamphetamine guidelines under Kimbrough v. United State, demonstrate a presumption that the District Court believed the sentencing guidelines to be reasonable; thereby, violating defendant’s sixth amendment right as stated in United States v. Booker. \f so, since Constitutional claims are permitted by Petitioner’s appeal waiver in this case, shouldn’t the Eighth Circuit have considered this claim rather than dismissing it? ii