Supreme Court won't hear appeal from company resisting Mueller subpoena

[Eugene]

Source: Washington Post

By Robert Barnes March 25 at 9:55 AM

The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not review a lower-court order requiring an unnamed foreign-owned corporation to comply with a subpoena that is part of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

As is customary, the court did not give a reason for turning down the company’s appeal, nor were there noted 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.

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.

-snip-


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-wont-hear-appeal-from-company-resisting-mueller-subpoena/2019/03/25/2002c508-4f03-11e9-88a1-ed346f0ec94f_story.html

[Kablooie]

1. Does this mean that Mueller was forced to release his report before it was done?

He never got the info from the mystery company.

[Javaman]

2. I was thinking about this and it occured to me that Mueller's report dealt with the russia-election

collusion connection, but as far as we know (since the report hasn't been released to the public), it didn't deal with money laundering with the russians. That still could still be very active.

[watoos]

3. Good point

The article doesn't say if the corporation investigation is done? Could Mueller have handed it off to someone else?

[Wednesdays]

4. That may be the reason the SCOTUS passed on it

Because the issue is now moot?

[FBaggins]

6. Definitely not moot

There's an active prosecution underway.

Just because Mueller concluded that Trump didn't collude with their actions doesn't mean that their actions weren't illegal.

[bluestarone]

5. This is what i believe!

Why did he end his investigation, before receiving this? Something smells really bad here!

[dajoki]

7. Something REALLY smells...

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100211949267

[FBaggins]

8. No. They're alluded to in Barr's summary of the report

Mueller (or Barr's summary if we want to pick nits) does NOT claim that no Russian meddling occurred (in fact, it lists some)... just that they couldn't conclude that Trump was involved.

I suppose that we could imagine a world where they would try to cut a deal and turn on provide evidence that Trump WAS involved... but why would they do that even if true? Mueller doesn't have any leverage over them.