Whether the Supreme Court's holding in Kisor v. Wilkie applies to the United States Sentencing Guidelines and whether a sentencing court errs in deferring to Guidelines commentary over plain language

In Stinson v. United States , 508 U.S. 36 (1993), th is Court held that the United States Sentencing Commission’s commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines was akin to an agen cy’s interpretation of its own regulations. As such, this Court held that the Commission’s commentary was entitled to the same level of deference afforded to agency interpretation s. That deferential standard of review has historically been referred to as Auer deference, after this Court’s holding in Auer v. Robbins , 519 U.S. 452 (1997). More recently, however, in Kisor v. Wilkie , 588 U.S. 558 (2019) , this Court revisited the Auer standard, clarifying that an agency ’s interpretation is not entitled to deference unless the regulation in question is genuinely ambiguous. This Court held that where the language of a regulation is clear, courts should give effect to the plain language of the regulation , without reference to agency interpretation. Since that time, c ircuit courts have split evenly as to whether the commentary of the Sentencing Guidelines continues to enjoy the heighten ed level of deference described by Stinson and Auer , or whether this Court’s holding in Kisor applies equally to the Guidelines. The instant Petition for Certiorari present s two questions: 1. Whether this Court ’s holding in Kisor v. Wilkie , 588 U.S. 558 (2019) applie s to the United States Sentencing Guidelines ; and 2. If so, whether a sentencing court errs in deferring to the commentary of U.S.S.G. § 2E1.1 , over and above the plain language of U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(1).