Don Whitehead appeals his guilty-plea conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Whitehead contends that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional on its face because it does not require a substantial effect on interstate or foreign commerce. Alternatively, he contends that the factual basis for his plea was insufficient because the mere movement of a firearm from one state or country to another at some undetermined time in the past does not constitute a substantial effect on interstate or foreign commerce.

Whitehead raises these arguments solely to preserve them for possible Supreme Court review. As he acknowledges, they are foreclosed by existing Fifth Circuit precedent. See United States v. Guidry, 406 F.3d 314, 318-19 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 190, 163 L.Ed.2d 198 (2005); United States v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001).

AFFIRMED.