Supreme Court blocks House committee from immediately reviewing Trump's financial records
Source: Washington Post
The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a House committee from immediately reviewing President Trumps financial records, after the presidents lawyers agreed to an expedited review of a lower court ruling granting access. The courts action signals that, even as Congress considers impeaching Trump, the court will undertake a more complete consideration of the legal powers of Congress and state prosecutors to investigate the president while he is in office.
The court instructed Trumps lawyers to file a petition by Dec. 5 stating why it should accept the case for full briefing and oral argument. If the petition is eventually denied, the lower court ruling will go into effect. If accepted, the case likely will be heard this term, with a decision before the court adjourns at the end of June. Lower courts have also sided with a New York district attorney seeking access to much of the same financial information for a grand jury investigation. The New York decision already was on hold, and did not require immediate Supreme Court action.
This is a significant separation-of-powers clash between the president and Congress, Trumps personal lawyer William S. Consovoy said in a filing with the court in the case involving the House Oversight and Reform Committee. He said Trump is prepared to proceed on any schedule that the court deems appropriate.
The House on Thursday told the Supreme Court that review was not necessary. It said the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuits decision saying the House committee was entitled to the information is straightforward and based upon Supreme Court precedent. The committee is investigating whether senior government officials, including the president, are acting in the countrys best interest and not in their own financial interest, whether federal agencies are operating free from financial conflicts and with accurate information, and whether any legislative reforms are needed to ensure that these fundamental principles are respected, House General Counsel Douglas N. Letter told the justices in a filing Thursday.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-blocks-house-committee-from-immediately-reviewing-trumps-financial-records/2019/11/25/b73a26ac-0d79-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html
Original headline and article -
By Washington Post Staff
November 25, 2019 at 6:30 p.m. EST
President Trumps personal attorneys had requested a stay while the justices consider whether the House Oversight Committee can see his financial records. An appeals court had ruled that the committee was within its rights to issue a subpoena for the documents from Trumps longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA.
This is a developing story. It will be updated.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/11/25/supreme-court-puts-a-temporary-hold-on-allowing-house-committee-to-access-trumps-tax-records/
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,576 posts)hlthe2b
(102,106 posts)bluestarone
(16,851 posts)Is this the one where they agree to a decision by Dec 2nd? (speedy decision)
Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)The candidates offering up their tax returns is a somewhat recent thing and they've all done so voluntarily.
I'm still hoping the Supreme Court rules the correct way and allows Congress oversight, especially since they're asking for the returns from the accounting firm instead of from the crook, but it gets murky and that's what worries me.
Response to WhoWoodaKnew (Reply #5)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)The story is credited to the Washington Post staff, but Robert Barnes will be taking over for any update.
https://twitter.com/scotusreporter
Thanks, BRDS.
BumRushDaShow
(128,388 posts)I was trying to find your earlier thread on this case to stick an update in.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 26, 2019, 01:39 PM - Edit history (1)
I've already added a link there to this thread.
And now you know ............ the rest of the story.
Keep up the good work.
BumRushDaShow
(128,388 posts)That was the problem.
Cool and thank you!
JudyM
(29,185 posts)PuffedMica
(1,061 posts)This is where the investigators need to concentrate their efforts.
Scarsdale
(9,426 posts)secret, is very telling. What is he hiding? People with nothing to hide, hide nothing.