Did Kisor abrogate Stinson's holding?

QUESTION PRESENTED The Court held in Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019), that before a court may defer to an agency’s interpretation of its regulation, the court must find that the regulation is genuinely ambiguous. In Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993), the Court held that district courts must heed the Sentencing Commission’s commentary to a sentencing guideline because the commentary provides “concrete guidance as to how even unambiguous guidelines are to be applied in practice.” Did Kisor abrogate Stinson’s holding, as four circuits have held, or does the holding survive because the Commission is not an executive agency and the guidelines it issues are advisory, as at least two circuits have held? 1 STATEMENT OF