Me too

If she was indeed contemplating a sequel to the book or as one commenter suggested part 2 or the "Rest of the Story", and I was fortunate enough to know her personally, I would urge her to do so.

Another reason for no sequel is that it restricts the new work. You are expected to use some of the same characters and have them act consistent with the previous works. AR would not want restrictions like that on her writing. Her focus was Objectivism, the story was always secondary to that.

Re-writing the Constitution according to her Objectivist principles.

? to me ?

And a PS: If you have worked for any gov body, drawn any payout from any gov body other then SS that YOU paid into, registered as a DEM. Then you are ineligible to be included in the forming of the new govt.

Yes to the sequel. Start with the bridge dropping in the river and rebuild the USA with a tougher constitution and more iron clad rights!

For the first question, I have no idea.

For the second question, I say no.

What sort of sequel could she write? AS left us with the start of total collapse. So a sequel would either continue through the collapse and to rebuilding after, or jump to the rebuilding straight off.

In either case, what philosophical point of Objectivism would she be illustrating. All her writing in and around AS were to use the story to illustrate the philosophy.

The underlying question really comes down to.
What philosophical points does she still want to make?