This article is from the source 'washpo' 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.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-trump-tax-returns-financial-records/2020/07/09/8f274352-c1e2-11ea-9fdd-b7ac6b051dc8_story.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_homepage

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Supreme Court says Manhattan prosecutor may pursue Trump’s financial records, denies Congress access for now Supreme Court says Manhattan prosecutor may pursue Trump’s financial records, denies Congress access for now
(30 minutes later)
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected President Trump’s assertion that he enjoys absolute immunity from investigation while in office, allowing a New York prosecutor to pursue a subpoena of the president’s private and business financial records.The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected President Trump’s assertion that he enjoys absolute immunity from investigation while in office, allowing a New York prosecutor to pursue a subpoena of the president’s private and business financial records.
In a separate case, the court sent a fight over congressional subpoenas for the material back to lower courts because of “significant separation of powers concerns.” Since both cases involve more work at the lower level, it seems unlikely the records would be available to the public before the election.In a separate case, the court sent a fight over congressional subpoenas for the material back to lower courts because of “significant separation of powers concerns.” Since both cases involve more work at the lower level, it seems unlikely the records would be available to the public before the election.
Combined, the decisions offer the court’s most detailed examination of presidential power and congressional authority in decades, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority in both 7 to 2 decisions. The court seemed to avoid some tough questions in an attempt to achieve greater agreement. Combined, the decisions offer the court’s most detailed examination of presidential power and congressional authority in decades, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority in both 7-to-2 decisions. The court seemed to avoid some tough questions in an attempt to achieve greater agreement.
All members of the court rejected a sweeping claim of immunity promoted by the president and his lawyers.All members of the court rejected a sweeping claim of immunity promoted by the president and his lawyers.
“In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence,’” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in the New York case, citing an ancient maxim. “Since the earliest days of the Republic, ‘every man’ has included the President of the United States.” “In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence,’ ” Roberts wrote in the New York case, citing an ancient maxim. “Since the earliest days of the Republic, ‘every man’ has included the President of the United States.”
Read the Supreme Court’s opinion: Trump v. VanceRead the Supreme Court’s opinion: Trump v. Vance
Trump nominees Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh agreed with the outcomes of the cases. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented.Trump nominees Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh agreed with the outcomes of the cases. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented.
Trump reacted angrily, and inaccurately, on Twitter: “Courts in the past have given ‘broad deference’. BUT NOT ME!”Trump reacted angrily, and inaccurately, on Twitter: “Courts in the past have given ‘broad deference’. BUT NOT ME!”
Read the Supreme Court’s opinion: Trump v. MazarsRead the Supreme Court’s opinion: Trump v. Mazars
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. said in a statement: “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. Our investigation, which was delayed for almost a year by this lawsuit, will resume, guided as always by the grand jury’s solemn obligation to follow the law and the facts, wherever they may lead.”Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. said in a statement: “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. Our investigation, which was delayed for almost a year by this lawsuit, will resume, guided as always by the grand jury’s solemn obligation to follow the law and the facts, wherever they may lead.”
The president’s lawyer Jay Sekulow said in a statement, “We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress and New York prosecutors from obtaining the President’s tax records. We will now proceed to raise additional constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.”The president’s lawyer Jay Sekulow said in a statement, “We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress and New York prosecutors from obtaining the President’s tax records. We will now proceed to raise additional constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.”
The majority said that while Trump could not avoid a subpoena, he could challenge the specifics of it. And Kavanaugh and Gorsuch emphasized that in their concurring opinion, noting the court “unanimously agrees that this case should be remanded to the District Court, where the President may raise constitutional and legal objections to the subpoena as appropriate.” The majority said that while Trump could not avoid a subpoena, he could challenge the specifics of it. And Kavanaugh and Gorsuch emphasized that in their concurring opinion, noting the court “unanimously agrees that this case should be remanded to the District Court, where the President may raise constitutional and legal objections to the subpoena as appropriate.”
In the congressional case, the court tried to strike a balance between the chief executive and Congress, while lamenting that in the past, such conflicts were most often worked out between the political branches.In the congressional case, the court tried to strike a balance between the chief executive and Congress, while lamenting that in the past, such conflicts were most often worked out between the political branches.
The court reinforced Congress’s broad investigative power, but said it is not limitless and must be more targeted when it comes to subpoenas for a president’s personal information.The court reinforced Congress’s broad investigative power, but said it is not limitless and must be more targeted when it comes to subpoenas for a president’s personal information.
Without limits, the court warned, “Congress could declare open season on the President’s information held by schools, archives, internet service providers, e-mail clients, and financial institutions.”Without limits, the court warned, “Congress could declare open season on the President’s information held by schools, archives, internet service providers, e-mail clients, and financial institutions.”
The majority came up with a new four-part test for courts to analyze the validity of subpoenas aimed at the president.The majority came up with a new four-part test for courts to analyze the validity of subpoenas aimed at the president.
Among other factors, the court said Congress cannot seek the president’s information as part of a case study for general legislation if other sources are available. Lawmakers also must narrow their requests and detail how the president’s information will advance possible legislation. The court said Congress cannot seek the president’s information as part of a case study for general legislation if other sources are available. Lawmakers also must narrow their requests and detail how the president’s information will advance possible legislation.
But even with the restrictions, the court rejected the administration’s view of how limited Congress’s inquiries may be.But even with the restrictions, the court rejected the administration’s view of how limited Congress’s inquiries may be.
“The standards proposed by the President and the Solicitor General — if applied outside the context of privileged information — would risk seriously impeding Congress in carrying out its responsibilities,” the court said.“The standards proposed by the President and the Solicitor General — if applied outside the context of privileged information — would risk seriously impeding Congress in carrying out its responsibilities,” the court said.
House Democrats called the decision a win, but one with a cost.House Democrats called the decision a win, but one with a cost.
“While defeated on his claim that he’s above the law, Trump is now beyond the law until after November,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which requested Trump’s tax returns. “He may not be able to outrun the law, but he’s outrunning the clock.”“While defeated on his claim that he’s above the law, Trump is now beyond the law until after November,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which requested Trump’s tax returns. “He may not be able to outrun the law, but he’s outrunning the clock.”
Vance is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records to conceal hush payments to two women, including pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels, who alleged they had affairs with Trump years ago. Trump has denied those claims. Vance is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records to conceal hush payments to two women — including pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels — who alleged they had affairs with Trump years ago. Trump has denied those claims.
Meet the Manhattan district attorney doing battle with President Trump in courtMeet the Manhattan district attorney doing battle with President Trump in court
Vance is seeking Trump’s tax returns, among other records. The president has refused to make them public, unlike previous modern presidents. Because the records are for a grand jury investigation, they would not likely be disclosed before the election. Vance is seeking Trump’s tax returns, among other records. Trump, unlike previous modern presidents, has refused to make them public. Because the records are for a grand jury investigation, they probably would not be disclosed before the election.
Separately, three House committees have sought bypass the president to obtain his financial records from his longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA, and financial institutions. The committees, all controlled by Democrats, say they are needed to check Trump’s financial disclosures and inform whether conflict-of-interest laws are tough enough. Separately, three House committees have sought to bypass the president to obtain his financial records from his longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA, and financial institutions. The committees, all controlled by Democrats, say they are needed to check Trump’s financial disclosures and inform whether conflict-of-interest laws are tough enough.
Lawmakers’ line of investigation is more expansive than the district attorney’s. They have demanded information “about seven business entities, as well as the personal accounts of President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump,” according to the brief filed by the president’s private lawyers.Lawmakers’ line of investigation is more expansive than the district attorney’s. They have demanded information “about seven business entities, as well as the personal accounts of President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump,” according to the brief filed by the president’s private lawyers.
The congressional subpoenas followed testimony from Trump’s former fixer, attorney Michael Cohen, who told lawmakers that Trump had exaggerated his wealth to seek loans. Two committees subpoenaed Capital One and Deutsche Bank as part of their investigation into Russian money laundering and potential foreign influence involving Trump.The congressional subpoenas followed testimony from Trump’s former fixer, attorney Michael Cohen, who told lawmakers that Trump had exaggerated his wealth to seek loans. Two committees subpoenaed Capital One and Deutsche Bank as part of their investigation into Russian money laundering and potential foreign influence involving Trump.
Federal judges in New York and Washington, D.C. — at the district court and appeals court levels — had moved swiftly by court standards and repeatedly ruled against Trump and to uphold Congress’s broad investigative powers. Federal judges in New York and the District of Columbia — at the district court and appeals court levels — had moved swiftly by court standards and repeatedly ruled against Trump and to uphold Congress’s broad investigative powers.
Ann E. Marimow contributed to this story.Ann E. Marimow contributed to this story.