> There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, whi

> There is a massive difference between complying with the law and proving you comply. (Think: IRS audit.) > The MTA would be obligated to respond to them, which means legal bills. …why would the MTA be obligated to respond to them? They've no jurisdiction/sovereignty over an American transit agency. Why would they audit themselves against laws that don't apply to them? (Again, jurisdiction?) I've never worked for a company that audited itself against every law from every nation on Earth; we complied with the laws where we had a presence and did business.