Supreme Court rules against mystery corporation 'from Country A' fighting subpoena in Mueller invest [View all]

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Washington Post

The Supreme Court on Tuesday left in place a lower court order requiring an unnamed foreign-owned corporation to comply with a subpoena said to be part of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. The court dissolved a temporary stay that had been put in place by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. In a short order, it did not give a reason for the decision, nor did it note any dissents.

The entity that is the subject of the cloaked legal battle -- known in court papers simply as a "Corporation" from "Country A" -- is a foreign financial institution that was issued a subpoena by a grand jury hearing evidence in the special counsel investigation, according to two people familiar with the case. It is thought to be the first time that an aspect of Mueller's wide-ranging probe into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign has reached the Supreme Court.

Last year, a federal court in Washington ordered the corporation to pay a daily fine until it complied with the subpoena, according to court records. An appeals court panel upheld that decision last month, prompting the company's lawyers to appeal to the Supreme Court. Late last month, Roberts, who receives emergency petitions from the D.C. Circuit, put the order and the fines on hold until the justices could consider the matter.

The secret nature of the case has prompted a Washington guessing-game about the information that Mueller is pursuing. In the lower courts and at the Supreme Court, details of the legal battle to get information from the corporation have been sealed. At one point an entire floor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was closed to the public to protect the identity of the litigants.


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rules-against-mystery-corporation-from-country-a-fighting-subpoena-in-mueller-investigation/2019/01/08/a39b61ac-0d1a-11e9-84fc-d58c33d6c8c7_story.html

---

Full title: Supreme Court rules against mystery corporation from 'Country A' fighting subpoena in Mueller investigation

UPDATE above.

Original article -

By Washington Post Staff
January 8 at 3:38 PM

The court left in place a lower court order requiring an unnamed foreign-owned corporation to comply with a subpoena and dissolved a temporary stay that had been put in place by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. In a short order, it did not give a reason for the decision, nor did it note any dissents.

The entity that is the subject of the cloaked legal battle -- known in court papers simply as a "Corporation" from "Country A" -- is a foreign financial institution that was issued a subpoena by a grand jury hearing evidence in the special counsel investigation, according to two people familiar with the case.

This is a developing story. It will be updated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/01/08/supreme-court-rules-against-mystery-corporation-from-country-a-fighting-subpoena-in-mueller-investigation/?utm_term.958016d5efcb

----

From Seth Abramson -

Link to tweet

TEXT
Seth Abramson
✔
@SethAbramson

Some cases are so historic, SCOTUS feels it must weigh in just to preserve the rule of law. That was the case in Bush v. Gore, and in 2019 we'll often find it to be the case in the Trump-Russia probe. So initial SCOTUS intercessions, like Roberts', shouldn't cause undue surprise.
Chris Geidner
✔
@chrisgeidner

BREAKING: Supreme Court denies the foreign country-owned company's request to stay a contempt order resulting from its refusal to comply with a grand jury's subpoena. Chief Justice Roberts' "administrative stay" is vacated, so the result is the contempt order is back in effect.
View image on Twitter
267
3:48 PM - Jan 8, 2019

Link to tweet

TEXT
Seth Abramson
✔
@SethAbramson
· 17m

Some cases are so historic, SCOTUS feels it must weigh in just to preserve the rule of law. That was the case in Bush v. Gore, and in 2019 we'll often find it to be the case in the Trump-Russia probe. So initial SCOTUS intercessions, like Roberts', shouldn't cause undue surprise.

Seth Abramson
✔
@SethAbramson

2/ In other words we may at times in 2019 hear of an "administrative stay" coming out of SCOTUS that makes us think the Court is going to rule a certain way, when in fact it's simply taking hold of a case so that it can be the one to issue the case's final, determinative holding.