MATHIS, Circuit Judge. A jury convicted Yun Zheng and Yan Qiu Wu on four counts of harboring illegal noncitizens for commercial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (a)(1)(A)(v)(II).¹ Zheng and Wu now appeal, challenging the district court’s jury instructions. Specifically, they argue that the district court: (1) erred in instructing the jury on the meaning of “harboring” by not including a requirement that Zheng and Wu had acted intentionally and knowingly in shielding the illegal noncitizens from law enforcement; and (2) invaded the province of the jury by giving examples of “harboring” in the jury instructions. Finding no error, we affirm.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. In 2009, Clarence Goodwin received a 262-month sentence— one at the bottom of his guidelines range—for conspiring to distribute crack cocaine. The First Step Act of 2018 allowed defendants like Goodwin to seek a lower sentence based on changes to the sentencing laws that occurred after their offense. But the district court denied Goodwin’s motion for a reduced sentence primarily because his guidelines range remained the same even after considering these retroactive statutory changes. Goodwin now argues that the district court committed a procedural error by denying relief in a cursory order. He also argues that it committed a substantive error because his rehabilitation efforts (when combined with other legal changes) required the court to issue a below-guidelines sentence. Disagreeing on both fronts, we affirm.