Should the Haymond ruling be considered retroactive?

Questions Presented In a previous holding (United States v Haymond, 588 U.S., 139 S.Ct._, 204 L. Ed. 2d 897 LEXIS 4398 (2019), this Court ruled that 18 U.S.C. §3583(k) was unconstitutional due to its requirement of a mandatory minimum sentence without the benefit of a jury. This had the effect of, for the first time, applying criminal protections to the Supervised Release Statute (18 U.S.C. §3583). The Questions Presented in this petition are: 1) Should the Haymond ruling be considered retroactive? 2) Is Haymond in fact, a new line of jurisprudence? 3) Does the Unconstitutionality of §3583(k) invite Constitutional : scrutiny upon the entirety of §3583? , 4) If so, then does §3583 violate the 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments? 5) Is a Supervised Release Term of Life Unconstitutional? i