Did Congress intend the court's inherent powers and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 to apply extraterritorially, allowing Rule 44.1 analysis to be applied to overseas conduct or are federal courts prohibited by the presumption from disregarding a sovereign's official domestic acts under the Act-of-State Doctrine?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. This Court has consistently held there is a strong presumption against extraterritorial application of federal law. “Absent clearly expressed congressional intent to the contrary, federal laws will be construed to have only domestic application.” RJR Nabisco, Ine. v. European Cmty., 136 S. Ct. 2090, 2100 (2016). See also Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 183 S. Ct. 1659 (2013); Morrison v. National Austl. Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. 247 (2010). These holdings are in accord with the . Court’s view on the Act-of-State Doctrine and its recognition that matters “taken within [a sovereign’s] own jurisdictions shall be deemed valid.” W.S. Kirkpatrick & Co. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp., 493 U.S. 400, 409 (1990), The first question: . Did congress intend the court’s inherent powers and U.S. 28 U.S.C. § 1927 to apply extraterritorially allowing Rule 44.1 analysis to be applied to overseas conduct or are federal courts prohibited by the presumption from disregarding a sovereign’s official domestic acts under the Act-of-State Doctrine. The second question: Did congress intend a federal court’s inherent powers and those under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 to impose punitive sanctions for extraterritorial conduct without regard to full due process protections before a federal court for conduct claimed to be criminal under a sovereign’s law. In Roadway Express v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 766 (1980); Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 50 ii (1991); Mine Workers v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 826-830. and Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co v. Haeger, 581 U.S. __ (2017) this Court held that a finding of subjective bad faith is required before as sanctions may be awarded under inherent powers. The third question: Where a party has been directed to arbitration can the district court dismiss their claims and award monetary sanction without a causal connection to bad faith conduct.