Mousavi immigrated to the United States from Iran and became a naturalized citizen in 1999. He operated two businesses, one installing television satellite systems and the other organizing travel packages to Mecca for pilgrimages. During a 2006 audit of his tax returns, the IRS discovered that he had unreported income of $45,000 from a Kuwaiti company to help him develop his business in Iran, including a development of a prospective gas pipeline from Iran to Kuwait. Mousavi had no license from OFAC to transact business with Iran. Mousavi was convicted in the U.S. District Court for violating a U.S. embargo of Iran under IEEPA and the Iranian Transaction Regulations (ITR). The ITR prohibits any transaction or dealing in or related to buying, selling, brokering, or financing goods, technology, or services with Iran or its government, whether directly or indirectly. On appeal, Mousavi argued that his conviction should be reversed because he did not willfully intend to violate a specific law or regulation.
1. Why was the IRA investigation of Mousavi's unreported income from this transaction relevant to the conviction of violating the IEEPA?
2. Does it matter that Mousavi's contacts and arrangements were through an individual in Kuwait?
3. Do you think the court's decision adequately prevents an innocent person from being "ensnared" in a complex legal web of technical regulations that he or she doesn't understand?