The respondents are two Delaware corporations: Arabian American Oil Company (Aramco) and its subsidiary, Aramco Service Company (ASC). Aramco's principal place of business is Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and it is licensed to do business in Texas.
In 1979, Boureslan was hired by ASC as a cost engineer in Houston. A year later, he was transferred, at his request, to work for Aramco in Saudi Arabia. Boureslan remained with Aramco in Saudi Arabia until he was discharged in 1984. He instituted this suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Aramco and ASC. He sought relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act on the ground that he was harassed and ultimately discharged by respondents on account of his race, religion, and national origin.
1. Is the presumption that a federal law will or will not have extraterritorial application, if not otherwise stated?
2. What type of a legal analysis did the court apply, literal construction or contextual construction?
3. In light of immediate, subsequent action by Congress, did it appear that the statute had accurately reflected (and the court had iterated) Congress's intent?