Does the Federal Arbitration Act require enforcement of a bilateral arbitration agreement providing that an employee cannot raise representative claims, including under the California Private Attorneys General Act

QUESTION PRESENTED Does the Federal Arbitration Act require enforcement of a bilateral arbitration agreement providing that an employee cannot raise representative claims, including under the California Private Attorneys General Act. In other words, does the FAA and this Court’s precedent (e.g., Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 139 S.Ct. 1407; Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S.Ct. 1612 (2018); Kindred Nursing Ctr. L.P. v. Clark, 1387 S.Ct. 1421 (2017)) overrule the California Supreme Court's precedent in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 327 P.3d 129 (Cal. 2014)? This precise question is already pending before this Court in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, No. 20-1573 (certiorari granted Dec. 15, 2021) and has been raised in numerous past and pending petitions for certiorari.