Cage v. Louisiana (1990) 498 U.S. 39 established the rule that a jury instruction is unconstitutional if there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the instruction to allow conviction without proof beyond a reasonable doubt. AEDPA prohibits the successive filing of habeas petitions unless the applicant can show reliance “on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court.” (28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2)(A)). The Cage rule was not made retroactive to cases on collateral review. “Made” as used in the statute means “held.” Neither Cage itself or the later case of Sullivan v. Louisiana (1993) 508 U.S. 275, held its rule was retroactive. And, based upon principles of Teague v. Lane (1989) 489 U.S.288, concerning changes in a bedrock element of procedural fairness, the most petitioner can argue is that Cage should be retroactive. Finally, the court declined to make Cage retroactive in this case. (5-4)