Whether the Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(1) is not an unconstitutional expansion of the Commerce Clause in light of this Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1.) Whether the Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(1) is not an unconstitutional expansion of the Commerce Clause in light of this Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, 142 8S. Ct. 2228, 213 L.Ed.2d 545 (2022), which was issued after Defendant’s trial; and 2.) Whether the Circuit Court of Appeals erred by completely disregarding United States Supreme Court precedent when it excused the District Court’s cursory review of Walls’ argument for a variance in contradiction of the holding in Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 168 L. Ed. 2d 203 (2007) in which the Supreme Court held that a defendant's non-frivolous argument for a downward variance from the Guidelines requires "the judge ... go further and explain why he has rejected those arguments"; and 3.) Whether the Circuit Court of Appeals erred in finding that the 444-month sentence was substantively reasonable and did not violate the 8m amendment to the United States Constitution in light of Defendant’s significant and welldocumented mental health illnesses and his lack of any criminal history record prior to the offenses at issue. iii