1) Is a state law prescribing de novo judicial review for
challenged benefit determinations, regardless of any
discretion the Plan grants to the administrator,
preempted by ERISA? If not, does enforcing such a
state law with regard to the court challenge of a
beneficiary who resides outside of the state in which
the Plan was delivered violate the Commerce
Clause (as the Second Circuit ruled below)?

2) Should lower courts assessing challenged benefit
determinations enforce choice-of-law provisions
contained in an ERISA Plan and, if so, which of the
differing approaches employed by the circuits
should a lower court apply?

Whether state law prescribing de novo judicial review for challenged benefit determinations is preempted by ERISA, and whether enforcing such a state law with regard to a beneficiary residing outside the state violates the Commerce Clause