"“[A] Filipina woman named Corazon Tabion worked for Jordanian diplomats in Washington, D.C., where she claims they paid her 50 cents per hour for 16 hour workdays. They confiscated her passport, and made threats to have her arrested and deported if she left, abuses typical for the domestic worker of a diplomat. Ten years ago, Ms. Tabion filed suit against her employer, seeking her back wages, among other remedies. Ms. Tabion’s lawyers argued that an exception to immunity applied—the commercial activities exception. The Court disagreed with Ms. Tabion, and upheld immunity. One year later, the Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed this ruling in Tabion v. Mufti. Since then, advocates for the exploited workers of diplomats have been denied access to the courts in any case where diplomats invoke their immunity. . . . While the Convention does not define “commercial activity,” the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals for the United States ruled in Tabion v. Mufti that “commercial activity” includes only activities engaged in for personal profit, explicitly stating that domestic workers are not covered.” 73 F.3d 535 (4th Cir. 1996)" (thanks Yaman)