1. Whether the choice of a U.S. forum by U.S.-resident
plaintiffs is entitled to "less deference" under the doctrine
of forum non conveniens , rather than the strong deference
ordinarily provided to a U.S. resident's choice of forum,
when the U.S. plaintiffs are joined by foreign co-plaintiffs
and all plaintiffs as judgment creditors seek to enforce
their U.S. judgments obtained pursuant to the Foreign
Sovereign Immunities Act.

2. Whether the Constitution's separation of powers
principle requires a federal court, in applying the doctrine
of forum non conveniens , to follow a strong presumption
in favor of the choice of forum by plaintiffs who seek to
enforce and satisfy their U.S. judgments pursuant to a
statutory remedy expressly provided them by Congress
in furtherance of its foreign affairs determinations and
authorities.

Whether the choice of a U.S. forum by U.S.-resident plaintiffs is entitled to 'less deference' under the doctrine of forum non conveniens