Whether the Terrorism Enhancement under U.S.S.G. §3A1.4 was properly applied when the evidence failed to prove the defendant's conduct met the statutory requirements for a 'federal crime of terrorism'

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , oo The Terrorism Enhancement, found in the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("U.S.S.G") §341.4, when applied, “takes a wrecking ball to . ; the initial Guidelines range. George D. Brown, Punishing Terrorists: — Congress, the Sentencing Gonmission, the Guidelines, and the Courts, 23 . , Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 517, 520 (2014). It functions by both : . increasing the offense level at least 12 levels and elevating the . defendant to the highest Criminal History Category, irrespective of his , or her actual criminal history. ; To apply .the Terrorism Enhancement the intended victim of the : . conduct of conviction must be ‘the United States. It applies "[il]f the . offense is a felony that involved, or was intended to promote, a federal crime of terrorism." U.S.S.G. §3A1.4(a). The term “federal crime of | terrorism’ means “an offense that is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government _conduct’’ and is a violation of certain enumerated statutes. Id., appl. n.1; 18 U.S.C. §2332b(g)(5) (emphasis added). : The questions presented are: (1) whether the court below erred by upholding the application of Section 3A41.4's Terrorism’ Enhancement when the evidence presented at trial, or lack thereof, failed to prove Mr. Khweis's conduct met the burden necessary to reach the first prong of §3A1.4. ; (2) whether the function of the Terrorism Enhancement is : impermissible under the sentencing paradigm. ; \ * yy : : “