1. Whether a general choice-of-law clause in a contract that contains an arbitration agreement should be read, consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and this Court's decisions, to import state substantive law without importing state rules impairing arbitration, as ten federal courts of appeals and nine state courts of appeals have held, or whether a general choice-of-law clause should be read to incorporate both state substantive law and state arbitration principles, including those barring or otherwise evincing hostility to arbitration, as four state courts of appeals and one federal court of appeals have held.

2. Whether a litigant may avoid the enforcement of a contractual clause delegating questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator merely by stating that the litigant's objections to arbitration—which must ordinarily be resolved by the arbitrator—apply equally to the delegation clause itself.

Whether a general choice-of-law clause in a contract that contains an arbitration agreement should be read to import state substantive law without importing state rules impairing arbitration