They failed to establish jurisdiction over their intended targets.

No they did not.

You're both right and wrong. The SEC was told by a US court that they can in fact deliver a subpoena, so from the SEC perspective they've been given "jurisdiction". However the other side of the coin is that they've been granted permission to serve a subpoena to someone who isn't American, and to a company that doesn't have a presence in the US.

If Do Kwon decides to visit the US and hasn't complied, he may find himself getting arrested. If his company decides to have assets in the US, they may be seized. However until either of those things happen, which they won't*, then the US has zero teeth in this.

* assuming he doesn't visit the US again

> The SEC was told by a US court that they can in fact deliver a subpoena

Wrong. They served the subpoena first; they need no permission to do that. Then SEC sued to enforce the subpoena, and the SEC prevailed in their suit.

Then Do Kwon and Terraform applied to have enforcement of the subpoena stayed by the trial court pending appeal, and failed; they then attempted to get the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to stay the subpoena pending appeal, and failed, and currently are in the process of litigating the case before the Second Circuit.

To portray this as a case where the SEC has failed (spefctacularly or otherwise) to establish jurisdiction is false.

So the way this goes is, the Americans are patient. A week after you're hyper vigilant of course, a month after, a year after... and then 20 years later your best friend's daughter is getting married and she's insistent it has to be on Hawaii, and... next thing you know you're in handcuffs being led away by agents who weren't even born when you committed a crime.

*Or he isn't important enough to go get.

I think Russia might have some comment to make here on the potential reach of US/interested-parties law.

The incentives are thankfully lower here, though.