Whether 'facial plausibility' of a complaint filed by a victim of international terrorism committed in Israel may be judged by a different standard than complaints filed by victims of international terrorism elsewhere in the world

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether “facial plausibility” of a complaint filed by a victim of international terrorism committed in Israel may be judged by a different standard than complaints filed by victims of international terrorism elsewhere in the world. 2. Whether an American tax-free charity whose functions include collecting and providing taxdeductible contributions that support proPalestinian organizations including designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations may avoid discovery designed to produce admissible evidence that the charity aids and abets, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2), Hamas’ dispatch of terrorist incendiary balloons and kites that injure American citizens residing in southern Israel. 3. Whether the Rule 12(b)(6) standard that this Court applied in Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, and in Gonzalez v. Google LLC and that lower courts have applied to complaints in actions under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2) against international banks and massive corporate entities that provide extensive nonpolitical services should govern a lawsuit filed by US citizens injured by Hamasdirected terrorism against a US charity that has a single political focus and circuitously transfers contributed money to Hamas.