This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/19/nyregion/trump-tax-returns-lawsuit.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Trump Sues Manhattan D.A. Over Demand for 8 Years of His Tax Returns Trump Lawyers Argue He Cannot Be Criminally Investigated
(about 4 hours later)
A lawyer for President Trump said Thursday he had filed a lawsuit in federal court to challenge an attempt by state prosecutors in Manhattan to subpoena eight years of Mr. Trump’s personal and corporate tax returns. Lawyers for President Trump argued in a lawsuit filed on Thursday that he cannot be criminally investigated while in office, as they sought to block a subpoena from state prosecutors in Manhattan demanding eight years of his tax returns.
“In response to the subpoenas issued by the New York County District Attorney, we have filed a lawsuit this morning in federal court on behalf of the president in order to address the significant constitutional issues at stake in this case,” Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for the president, said in a statement. Taking a broad position that the lawyers acknowledged had not been tested, the president’s legal team argued in the complaint that the Constitution effectively makes sitting presidents immune from all criminal inquiries until they leave the White House.
The lawsuit was the latest effort by the president and his legal team to stymie attempts to obtain copies of his tax returns, which Mr. Trump initially said he would make public during the 2016 campaign but has since refused to disclose. The president “cannot be subject to criminal process, for conduct of any kind, while he is serving as president,” the lawyers wrote in the complaint, filed in Manhattan federal court.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office issued the subpoena late last month, seeking a range of tax documents from Mr. Trump’s accounting firm. The subpoena sought federal and state returns for both the president and his business, the Trump Organization, dating to 2011, according to several people with knowledge of the subpoena. While it is unclear how a judge will view the argument, the case is likely to delay the latest attempt to secure Mr. Trump’s financial records.
The office made the demand soon after opening a criminal investigation into the role that the president and his family business played in hush-money payments made in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. The lawsuit was filed in response to a subpoena issued late last month by the Manhattan district attorney’s office to Mr. Trump’s accounting firm. The subpoena sought eight years of the president’s personal and corporate tax returns as the office investigates the role that the Mr. Trump and his family business played in hush-money payments made in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.
Both Mr. Trump and the company reimbursed Michael D. Cohen, the president’s former lawyer and fixer, for money Mr. Cohen paid to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump. The president has denied the affair.Both Mr. Trump and the company reimbursed Michael D. Cohen, the president’s former lawyer and fixer, for money Mr. Cohen paid to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump. The president has denied the affair.
Both Mr. Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, and the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., are named in the lawsuit. Federal prosecutors said in a court filing in July that they had “effectively concluded” their investigation into possible crimes committed by the president’s company, the Trump Organization, or its executives. Neither the company nor any of its leaders were charged. However, the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., is exploring whether the reimbursements violated any New York State laws.
In a statement, Mazars USA said that it would not comment on work it conducted for Mr. Trump, but that it would “respect the legal process and fully comply with its legal obligations.” The lawsuit filed on Thursday was the latest effort by the president and his legal team to stymie multiple attempts to obtain copies of his tax returns, which Mr. Trump initially said he would make public during the 2016 campaign but has since refused to disclose.
A spokesman for Mr. Vance did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sued to block attempts by congressional Democrats and New York State lawmakers to access his tax returns and financial records. But their arguments in those cases had been made on narrower grounds.
It is an open question whether sitting presidents are immune from prosecution while in office. The Constitution does not explicitly address the issue, and the Supreme Court has never answered the question.
Federal prosecutors are barred from charging a sitting president with a federal crime, because the Justice Department — in memos written during the Nixon and Clinton administrations — has interpreted the Constitution to implicitly grant presidents temporary immunity while they are in office. Those memos, however, do not bind the hands of state prosecutors.
Presidents have been subject to federal criminal inquiries in the past, including Mr. Trump, who was recently a subject of an investigation conducted by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, that examined ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Mr. Mueller said in May that the Justice Department memo “explicitly permits” the investigation of presidents, although he acknowledged that they cannot be charged with federal crimes.
In their lawsuit, Mr. Trump’s lawyers took their arguments a step further, arguing that no criminal investigation of a sitting president was constitutional. They took particular issue with any investigation conducted by “a county prosecutor,” such as the Manhattan district attorney.
Mr. Vance’s office is seeking a range of tax documents from Mr. Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, including federal and state tax returns for both the president and the Trump Organization, dating to 2011.
In their lawsuit, Mr. Trump’s lawyers, who have repeatedly called Mr. Vance’s investigation politically motivated, wrote that state and local prosecutors were particularly susceptible to opening investigations to advance their careers at the expense of the federal government.
“A county prosecutor in New York, for what appears to be the first time in our nation’s history, is attempting to do just that,” the complaint said.
The complaint called prosecutors’ effort to obtain Mr. Trump’s personal records “a bad faith effort to harass the president by obtaining and exposing his confidential financial information.”
Mr. Trump’s lawyers are seeking an injunction stopping both Mazars USA and Mr. Vance from taking action on the subpoena until after Mr. Trump leaves office.
“We are in court to protect the president’s rights and the Constitution,” said Marc L. Mukasey, a lawyer for the Trump Organization.
A spokesman for Mr. Vance said the district attorney would respond in court and had no additional comment. Mazars USA said it would “respect the legal process and fully comply with its legal obligations.”
Mr. Vance’s investigation has been focused on $130,000 that Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Daniels just before the election. Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty last year to violating federal campaign finance laws. He received a three-year prison sentence.Mr. Vance’s investigation has been focused on $130,000 that Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Daniels just before the election. Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty last year to violating federal campaign finance laws. He received a three-year prison sentence.
The federal prosecutors who charged Mr. Cohen said in a court filing in July that they had “effectively concluded” their investigation into possible crimes committed by the Trump Organization or its executives. Mr. Vance’s office, however, is exploring whether the reimbursements violated any New York state laws. Mr. Vance’s office has been investigating whether the Trump Organization falsely accounted for the reimbursements as a legal expense. It was unclear if the scope of the subpoena — including Mr. Trump’s personal records — meant that the inquiry had widened.
In particular, the state prosecutors are investigating whether the Trump Organization falsely accounted for the reimbursements as a legal expense. In New York, filing a false business record can be a felony only if prosecutors can prove that the filing was made to commit or conceal another crime, such as tax violations or bank fraud. In New York, filing a false business record can be a felony only if prosecutors can prove that the filing was made to commit or conceal another crime, such as tax violations or bank fraud. Mr. Trump’s tax returns, if Mr. Vance’s office obtains them, would be protected by rules governing grand jury secrecy and not become public unless they were used as evidence in a criminal case.
The documents sought from Mazars USA could shed light on whether state laws were broken. Ben Protess, Charlie Savage and William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.
Democrats have insisted since Mr. Trump was on the campaign trail that he release his tax returns, something that every modern presidential nominee had done before him.
They have argued that the president may be trying to conceal details of his actual financial worth, the source of his wealth and any possible conflicts of interest involving his business partners.
Congressional Democrats have taken an aggressive approach, subpoenaing six years of Mr. Trump’s tax returns from the Treasury Department, as well as financial records from Deutsche Bank, Capital One and Mazars USA. The president has challenged those subpoenas in federal court.
Mr. Trump also sued to block a New York State law, passed this year, that allowed state officials to provide his state tax returns in response to certain congressional inquiries.
By tying up those requests in court, Mr. Trump’s team has made it less likely that Democrats in Washington will get the chance to review the records before the presidential election next year.
Ben Protess contributed reporting.