Supreme Court Refuses to Shield Mystery Foreign Company From Mueller’s Investigation

January 9, 2019

By David G. Savage and Chris Megerian

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to block a subpoena issued to an unnamed corporation, owned by a foreign government, ending a mystery dispute in the courts reportedly involving the investigation into Russian election meddling.

The outcome is believed to be a victory for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who is seeking to learn about the flow of foreign money that may have played a role in the 2016 campaign.

But most of the details of the dispute, including the name of the foreign country, remain unknown.

Like other federal investigations, Mueller presented evidence to a grand jury, and by law, the proceedings of the grand jury are kept secret to shield people who are innocent of wrongdoing.

Sometimes people or companies object to providing testimony or documents to the grand jury, and if so, they can appeal to a federal judge. These proceedings, too, are kept secret.

A federal judge in Washington and the U.S. Court of Appeals here refused to quash the subpoena. The mystery company filed an appeal under seal with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. It was the rare case in which the legal issues — and even the party to the case — were not revealed.

The Washington Post, CNN and others have reported that the subpoena was issued by the grand jury that has been reviewing evidence in the Russia investigation.

Lawyers who had followed the dispute speculated that the foreign company could have argued that federal law provides legal immunity for foreign nations. However, that immunity can be waived if the entity does business in the United States.

Last month, Roberts granted a temporary stay to the foreign firm, signaling the court may be willing to take up its claims.

But on Tuesday, the court issued a brief order titled “In Re Grand Jury subpoena.”

“The application for stay, presented to the chief justice and by him referred to the court, is denied. The administrative stay previously entered by the chief justice is vacated,” it said. This returns the case to the federal court and allows Mueller to enforce the subpoena.

Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, said he wasn’t surprised that Mueller’s office refused to give up the legal scuffle.

“Prosecutors don’t usually abandon subpoena fights,” he said.

It’s unclear how important the subpoena will be. “You can’t say this is the holy grail of the special counsel investigation,” Turley said. But it “reinforces the view that Mueller is diving deeply into potential financial crimes.”

The secrecy is not surprising, he added. “It’s not as unusual as people may think,” he said. “The court does not want to compromise a grand jury investigation.”

———

©2019 Los Angeles Times

Visit the Los Angeles Times at www.latimes.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Appears Set to Overturn Mississippi Murder Case Based on Racial Bias Supreme Court
Supreme Court Appears Set to Overturn Mississippi Murder Case Based on Racial Bias

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court justices sounded ready Wednesday to overturn a Mississippi murder conviction because of racial bias in selecting jurors. It marked the latest chapter in an extraordinary case involving a small-town white prosecutor who had repeatedly barred most or all black jurors from... Read More

Supreme Court Weighs Alleged Racial Gerrymandering In Virginia Case Supreme Court
Supreme Court Weighs Alleged Racial Gerrymandering In Virginia Case
March 19, 2019
by Dan McCue

As oral arguments got underway in the first of two high-profile gerrymandering cases the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this month, the justices appeared to be treading carefully despite their familiarity with claims they've heard once before. The case, Va. House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, not... Read More

Supreme Court to Decide if Insanity Defense and Unanimous Jury Are Required Nationwide Supreme Court
Supreme Court to Decide if Insanity Defense and Unanimous Jury Are Required Nationwide

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to resolve two long-standing disputes and decide whether the Constitution includes rights to the insanity defense and a unanimous jury verdict of guilt. Most states permit criminal defendants to plead insanity and escape the full punishment of the law... Read More

Justices to Consider Whether Census Citizenship Question Is Unconstitutional Supreme Court
Justices to Consider Whether Census Citizenship Question Is Unconstitutional
March 18, 2019
by Dan McCue

The Supreme Court on Friday expanded the scope of oral arguments slated for April 23 on whether to reinstate a controversial question about citizenship proposed for the 2020 census to consider if the inquiry would violate the Constitution. Lower courts in New York and California have... Read More

Messy Issue of Gerrymandering About to Dominate High Court Docket Supreme Court
Messy Issue of Gerrymandering About to Dominate High Court Docket
March 15, 2019
by Dan McCue

Over the next two weeks, the docket of the U.S. Supreme Court will be dominated by issues it has recently preferred to punt back to lower courts: racial and partisan gerrymandering. On Monday, the justices will hear oral arguments in a case accusing the Virginia House... Read More

Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Expand Census Citizenship Case Supreme Court
Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Expand Census Citizenship Case

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to expand its scheduled April showdown over the 2020 census to decide whether the Constitution lets the government ask whether people are American citizens. In a letter dated Monday, U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco said the court... Read More

Straight From The Well
scroll top