Whether the Fourth Circuit applied the correct legal standard in rejecting Petitioner's as-applied challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and correctly concluded the statute's categorical ban on firearm possession by felons is constitutional

Petitioner Shawn Johnson was a felon only because of his nonviolent offenses of manufacturing and uttering counterfeit United States currency. After being convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), the Fourth Circuit rejected his as -applied challenge to the constitutionality of Section 922(g)(1) because it categorically rejects all as -applied challenges to Section 922(g)(1)’s constitutionality. Did the Fourth Circuit apply the wrong legal standard to Petitioner’s as -applied challenge? And did the Fourth Cir cuit err in concluding that Section § 922(g)(1)’s categorical ban on the possession of a firearm —by each and every convicted felon —is constitutional .