Is it reasonable foreseeable that the controlled substance may be methamphetamine?

That Jauregui admitted that "it was reasonably foreseeable that the controlled substance may be methamphetamine" would not, under traditional conspiracy law, establish that he knowingly joined a conspiracy whose object was importing methamphetamine. Although Jaureguis lack of awareness regarding his coconspirators involvement of methamphetamine may have been negligent, "[o]ne cannot negligently enter into a conspiracy." United States v. Ganji , 880 F.3d 760, 776 (5th Cir. 2018). As the building destruction illustration discussed above demonstrates, coconspirators who plan to bomb a building can reasonably foresee that people will die as a result of a buildings destruction but not intend for that result. See 2 LaFave, supra , 12.2(c)(2). Under those circumstances, they could perhaps be liable for reckless murder, negligent homicide, or felony murder. See id. But that reasonable foreseeability alone does not give rise to liability for conspiracy to commit a homicide.