Supreme Court ruling upholds demands for Trump's taxes

Share

The US Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump must release his financial records so that they can be examined by prosecutors in NY.

It's unclear, even if Trump loses, how much of the material would become public, since some records would go to a confidential grand-jury investigation in NY and the rest, sought by committees of the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, could contain highly sensitive information not just about Trump, but also about other members of his family and businesses.

"I think we could see both this President and any future president turn to the court and litigate the legality of any congressional subpoena that goes after their personal information", said Sarah Turberville, the director of The Constitution Project at Project On Government Oversight, a government transparency organization.

In the NY case, they were sceptical about a Trump lawyer's argument that a president can not be investigated while in office. This case was sent to a lower court for further review.

In the NY case, Trump's records were subpoenaed by a grand jury, which would keep the information private.

Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Rutgers Institute for Secure Communities, tweeted that the lawyer who argued the case for Congress before the high court bears some responsibility for that setback.

"The Third Circuit Court of Appeals" judgement that federal agencies had no authority to exempt the Little Sisters in the first place "was erroneous", Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his majority opinion. A subpoena to Deutsche Bank sought records on loans taken out by Trump and his organization.

That decision, on a criminal case, was just one of two taken on Thursday about Mr Trump's financial records. You can nearly picture the chief justice at conference announcing dual principles to get his 7-2 majority, one to please the liberal wing, the other to mollify at least Brett M. Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

Trump promised to release his tax returns during his 2016 campaign for the White House but has declined to do so. Much the same is true in the Vance case, but in that instance, Trump's record will remain out of view primarily because the records sought will be covered by grand jury secrecy.

City of Long Beach to close beaches over Fourth of July weekend
There are 1,889 people now hospitalized, 27 percent of these people are in the ICU and 18 percent are on ventilators. Garfield, the state's least populous county, remains the only county without a reported case.

The 7-2 majority determined that a president is not entitled to absolute immunity from a state court grand jury proceeding but that they can challenge a subpoena issued on constitutional and legal grounds.

In both cases, Chief Justice John Roberts sided with more liberal justices.

The fight over the congressional subpoenas has significant implications regarding a president's power to refuse a formal request from Congress.

Alito, in a dissenting opinion, argued that presidents should not be subject to prosecution while in office because "the nature of the office demands in some instances that the application of laws be adjusted at least until the person's term ends".

"We have held that each house has power to secure needed information in order to legislate", he said, affirming the power of Congress to legitimately subpoena the president.

The congressional subpoenas case also returns to the trial court where it must consider separation of powers concerns.

"This is a tremendous victory for our nation's system of justice and its founding principle that no one - not even a president - is above the law", Cy Vance Jr, the Manhattan district attorney, said.

In the litigation over the House subpoenas, Mr Trump argued that Congress lacked a valid goal for seeking his records and that disclosure of the material would compromise his and his family's privacy and distract him from his duties.

Trump, for his part, vociferously defended himself Thursday.

Share