Help : what does this mean? (filed with SCOTUS)

[triron]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-948/89144/20190221172445463_18-948%20In%20re%20Grand%20Jury%20Subpoena.pdf

[elleng]

1. To begin:A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia issued a subpoena

to petitioner, a commercial enterprise doing business in the United States and owned by a foreign government. Petitioner refused to comply and
moved to quash the subpoena, arguing in relevant part
that, because it is owned by a foreign government, the
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA or
Act), 28 U.S.C. 1330, 1602 et seq., immunizes it from all
criminal process. The district court rejected that and
petitioner’s other challenges, ordered compliance, and
held petitioner in civil contempt when it refused to comply. The court of appeals affirmed. Supp. App. 1a-27a;
Pet. App. 1a-6a.
1. a. “[F]oreign sovereign immunity is a matter of
grace and comity.”>>>

Read the attachment carefully (if you are able.) It's complex, as is much of the law.

FINALLY, 'Petitioner contends (Pet. 15-38) that this Court
should grant certiorari to decide (1) whether foreignstate-owned enterprises are categorically immune from
all criminal proceedings, including grand jury proceedings; and, (2) if not, whether a district court can impose
monetary contempt sanctions on such an enterprise for
violation of a court order requiring compliance with a
grand jury subpoena. The court of appeals correctly decided both questions, and neither question warrants
this Court’s review.'

[bullimiami]

4. If a company can't follow the law here, it shouldn't be allowed to do business here.

And if they have assets in the US those should also be subject to US laws. Including civil.

[pnwmom]

2. As I understand it (not a lawyer, but I read about this in some analysis today)

this is the US response arguing against the Mystery Company that doesn't want to comply with the Mueller subpoena. Their argument, as I understand it, is that they are a government owned company so they should be treated just like a sovereign nation in the courts -- not subject to our criminal process -- even if the company commits crimes in the U.S.

Francisco has written this brief in opposition to that idea.

[jberryhill]

3. That is the government's argument

...against the “company owned by a foreign government” claiming that it is immune from certain penalties attaching to failure to comply with a subpoena.

The FSIA - the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act - confers immunity of foreign sovereign entities against a roster of ordinary legal processes.

There are only very limited circumstances in which you can go after a foreign sovereign entity in court.

[jberryhill]

5. On behalf of everyone who took the time to answer your question.

You’re welcome.