this Court, as well as the United States Court of Appeals in the D.C. Circuit, said there's no rational connection between the possible sentence and the possible length of stay after an acquittal, not guilty by reason of insanity? I believe that the law in the United States Court of Appeals in Brown against the United States and in Wade v. Jacobs, in both of those cases the Court suggested that there is a relationship between the sentence that might have been imposed and the length that the commitment can persist without the Government proving, uh, proving commitability under civil commitment standards. I don't think that this Court has, has uh, has addressed that question, and I then think this is the first case that raises it. Oh,