The Restatement (Second) Conflict of Law refers to which of the following?

The Restatement (Second) Conflict of Law is indeed focused on the principles that guide the resolution of legal conflicts that arise when different jurisdictions have competing laws applicable to a particular situation. It serves as a guideline for courts in deciding which jurisdiction's laws should apply, based on various factors such as the location of the parties, the nature of the rights involved, and the policies underlying the conflicting laws. This framework helps to bring consistency and predictability in legal outcomes when discrepancies between state or international laws occur, thereby playing a crucial role in managing legal uncertainty in multi-jurisdictional scenarios.

The other options do not accurately capture the essence of this legal concept. While judges certainly restate law in their opinions, that practice refers to the act of judicial interpretation rather than the framework for resolving conflicts. The application of federal versus local laws involves a different set of principles, primarily revolving around preemption and jurisdiction, rather than the broader context of conflicting laws. Lastly, jurisdictional disputes pertain to the authority of courts rather than the specific laws that govern substantive legal issues, which is the focus of the Restatement (Second) Conflict of Law.