Opinion ID: 204163
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Challenge to AEDPA's Constitutionality

Text: Finally, Abrante argues that AEDPA violates his right to petition the government for redress of grievances under the First Amendment by preventing federal review of constitutional issues of first impression decided by state courts. Abrante premises this argument on his claim that the constitutional issues presented in his habeas petition are issues of first impression. This assertion is incorrect. The issues raised by Abrante fall well within the bounds of established Supreme Court precedent, and, as we have held, [t]he Constitution is not offended when lower federal courts are prevented from substituting for that of a state court their judgment as to reasonable application of Supreme Court precedent. Evans v. Thompson, 518 F.3d 1, 8 (1st Cir. 2008). Thus, the issues Abrante raises do not present us with the opportunity to consider his constitutional challenge to AEDPA. -16-