Whether the inclusion of inchoate offenses within the commentary is inconsistent with the text of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, rendering the commentary not legally binding

Questions Presented The career offender enhancement in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 dramatically increases the sentences of defendants who, among other things, have been convicted of certain drug offenses. The text of the guideline defines the term “controlled substance offense” to mean an offense “that prohibits the manufacture, import, export, distribution, or dispensing” of certain controlled substances. Commentary to that enhancement broadens the text’s definition by including inchoate offenses such as “aiding and abetting, conspiring, and attempting to commit such offenses.” This case presents two questions concerning the commentary that have split the circuit courts: 1. Whether the inclusion of inchoate offenses within the commentary is inconsistent with the text of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, rendering the commentary not legally binding. 2. Whether federal conspiracy, 21 U.S.C. § 846, is a predicate “controlled substance offense” when it does not require the commission of an overt act, as conspiracy offenses are generically defined. i