Whether the court of appeals improperly afforded Auer deference to a federal agency's informal interpretation of a regulation

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether, in light of this Court’s decisions in Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997), and Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019), the court of appeals improperly afforded Auer deference to a federal agency’s informal “interpretation” of a regulation without first G) resolving whether the applicable regulation is ambiguous, after engaging in any traditional tools of regulatory and_ statutory construction; and (ii) performing any independent inquiry as to whether the purported “interpretation” reflects the fair and considered judgment of the agency.