Case 1:20-mc-00036-JEB-DAR Document 8 Filed 08/04/20 Page 6 of 18 to Congress satisfies [18 U.S.C. § 2523].” 18 U.S.C. § 2702(b)(9). That provision, which Congress enacted as part of the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (“CLOUD Act”) in 2018, was designed to balance a foreign government’s legitimate need for certain communications data held by U.S. companies against the rights of the companies’ account holders. The SCA also contains an exception that would permit Facebook to provide The Gambia with non-content information about users’ communications. 18 U.S.C. § 2702(c)(7). The Gambia, however, has not utilized any of these lawful mechanisms, choosing instead to file a Section 1782 application that violates U.S. law. This Court should deny the application. BACKGROUND In October 2019, The Gambia brought an action against the Republic of Myanmar in the ICJ under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (“Genocide Convention”). Appl. at 6. The Genocide Convention, to which both The Gambia and Myanmar are parties, grants the ICJ jurisdiction over “[d]isputes between the Contracting Parties ... relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide.” Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Art. IX, 78 U.N.T.S. 277. The Gambia and Myanmar are the only parties to the ICJ proceeding, see Appl. at 6, and the ICJ has no jurisdiction over crimes committed by individuals. The Gambia alleges in the ICJ proceeding that Myanmar is responsible for acts of genocide committed against the Rohingya people, an ethnic and religious minority in Myanmar, and seeks an order directing Myanmar to cease further genocidal acts against the Rohingya. Id. at 1. To prevail, The Gambia must prove that Myanmar committed an act enumerated in Article II of the Genocide Convention, including “killing, causing serious bodily and mental harm, inflicting conditions that are calculated to bring about physical destruction, and imposing 2