Bowe v. United States · ¶159

Exactly nothing in this history or AEDPA's structure suggests Congress sought to loosen do-over restrictions for any- one—let alone completely do away with those restrictions for federal prisoners. To the contrary, the statute's history and structure suggest, as we have long observed, that AEDPA imposed new and “strict[er] limit[s]” on postconviction relief. Jones, 599 U. S., at 476. All of which indicates, once again, that Congress meant what it said in § 2244(b)(3)(C): The “requirements of this subsection” apply to federal and state prisoners alike—and those requirements include subsection (b)(1)'s bar on do-over claims.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.