> Sure, the U.S. government cannot send agents to search Irish homes owned by U.S. citizens, but it can damn well order the citizen in question to retrieve and present a certain document that is known to be stored in the basement of that home, and threaten to hold him in contempt if he fails to have it shipped stateside within a few weeks.
Even when the document in question doesn't belong to said citizen?
U.S. courts (and all courts everywhere) can compel you to produce any document or item under your control, whether or not you actually "own" it.
Your cousin Bob gave you a sealed letter to hold for him and the court says you have to hand it over? You must.
And calling it "theft" is an attempt to prejudice the discussion. Theft is taking without due process of law. By definition, taking at the command of a court is with due process of law.
> And calling it "theft" is an attempt to prejudice the discussion. Theft is taking without due process of law. By definition, taking at the command of a court is with due process of law.
By the same token I could come and repossess your car after obtaining a judgement against you in a foreign court if it was in my parking lot, right?
>And calling it "theft" is an attempt to prejudice the discussion. Theft is taking without due process of law. By definition, taking at the command of a court is with due process of law.
Not if the taking is in a jurisdiction the court commanding it has no power over. Which was the point here.
Even when the document in question doesn't belong to said citizen?
Can a US court compel you to commit theft abroad?