Whether a defendant retains the right to appeal an as-applied Second Amendment challenge after pleading guilty under the Menna-Blackledge doctrine, and whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) is unconstitutional for prohibiting firearm possession by drug users

question presented is whether, in light of the Menna-Blackledge doctrine, a defendant whose “constitutional claims...do not contradict” his guilty plea and who maintains “he did what the indictment alleged,” retains his right to appeal the denial of an as-applied Second Amendment challenge after pleading guilty. Accord id. at 181-82. 2. The second question presented in this case is similar to the question posed in No. 24-5089, Veasley v. United States, regarding the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), a federal categorical firearm prohibition for “users” of controlled substances. In N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 70-71 (2022), this Court emphasized the appropriate Second Amendment analysis requires a faithful application of the Nation’s historical tradition. On that point, and as it relates to Section 922(g)(3), the Government has been ii consistent: “Prior to 1968, it appears Congress had not enacted a federal law criminalizing the possession of firearms by addicts or drug users.” Government Appellee Br., at 20 (8th Cir. Feb. 23, 2024). This Court’s recent decision in Rahimi applied this historical traditions test to a different categorical firearm prohibition, and highlighted a specific feature absent in Section 922(g)(3)— prior judicial determination. E.g., United States v. Rahimi, 144 S. Ct. 1889, 1903 (2024) (“An individual found by a court to pose a credible threat...may be temporarily disarmed.” (emphasis supplied)). Accordingly, the second question presented in this Petition is whether, consistent with Bruen and Rahimi, the federal firearm prohibition contained in Section 922(g)(3) is unconstitutional facially and as-applied to marijuana users by virtue of their drug use alone. 3. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) is unconstitutionally vague for the failure to clearly define the temporal nexus between drug use and firearm possession. ili