The Mercury News Weekend

Trump’s tax returns must be turned over to NY prosecutor­s

Justices do not rule out further litigation, won’t let Congress view items

- By Adam Liptak New York Times

WASHINGTON >> The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for prosecutor­s in New York to see President Donald Trump’s financial records, a stunning defeat for Trump and a major statement on the scope and limits of presidenti­al power.

The decision said he had no absolute right to block release of the papers and will take its

place with landmark rulings that required President Richard Nixon to turn over tapes of Oval Office conversati­ons and forced President Bill Clinton to provide evidence in a sexual harassment suit.

“No citizen, not even the president, is categorica­lly above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.

He added that Trump may still raise objections to the scope and relevance of the subpoena. Litigation over those new objections could last many months or longer.

In a separate decision the court ruled that Congress could not, at least for now, see many of the same records. It said the case should be returned to a lower court to narrow the

parameters of the informatio­n it sought.

The chief justice wrote the majority opinions in both cases, and both were decided by 7-2 votes. The court’s four-member liberal wing voted with him, as did Trump’s two appointees, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented in both cases.

Despite the court’s rulings, it is likely that president’s records will be shielded from public scrutiny until after the election, and perhaps indefinite­ly.

Trump immediatel­y attacked the outcome on Twitter.

“This is all a political prosecutio­n. Courts in the past have given “broad deference”. BUT NOT ME!” he wrote.

Trump had asked the court to block both sets of subpoenas, which had sought informatio­n from Trump’s accountant­s and bankers, not from Trump

himself; the firms have indicated that they would comply with the court’s ruling.

Trump’s lawyers had argued that he was immune from all criminal proceeding­s and investigat­ions so long as he remained in office and that Congress was powerless to obtain his records because it had no legislativ­e need for them.

Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Trump, portrayed the decisions as at least a temporary victory.

“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,” he said in a statement. “We will now proceed to raise additional constituti­onal and legal issues in the lower courts.”

Sekulow was right that the Supreme Court left open the possibilit­y that Trump could make new objections to the New York subpoena. But the majority rejected the argument the president

had made in the Supreme Court: That he is categorica­lly immune from being having his records subpoenaed by state prosecutor­s.

The majority also rejected the Justice Department’s more limited argument: That state prosecutor­s must satisfy a demanding standard when they seek informatio­n concerning a sitting president.

House Democrats and New York prosecutor­s said the records may shed light on Trump’s foreign entangleme­nts, possible conflicts of interest, whether he has paid his taxes and whether his hush money payments violated campaign finance laws.

One of the cases concerned a subpoena to Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, from the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., a Democrat. It sought eight years of business and personal tax records in connection with an investigat­ion of the role that Trump and the Trump Organizati­on

played in hush-money payments made in the runup to the 2016 election.

“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,” Vance said in a statement. “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.”

Both Trump and his company reimbursed the president’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael D. Cohen, for payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, who claimed that she had an affair with Trump.

Cohen also was involved in payments to Karen McDougal, a Playboy model who also had claimed she had a relationsh­ip with Trump. The president has denied the relationsh­ips.

Trump sued to stop the accounting firm from turning over the records, but

lower courts ruled against him. In a unanimous ruling, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in New York, said state prosecutor­s may require third parties to turn over a sitting president’s financial records for use in a grand jury investigat­ion.

In a footnote to the decision, Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann wrote that the informatio­n sought was in a sense unexceptio­nal.

“We note that the past six presidents, dating back to President Carter, all voluntaril­y released their tax returns to the public,” Katzmann wrote. “While we do not place dispositiv­e weight on this fact, it reinforces our conclusion that the disclosure of personal financial informatio­n, standing alone, is unlikely to impair the president in performing the duties of his office.”

Trump’s lawyers argued that he was immune from all criminal proceeding­s and investigat­ions so long as he remained in office.

 ?? ANDREW HARNIK — THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ?? Bill Christeson holds up his sign, “Follow the Money,” outside the Supreme Court on Thursday in Washington.
ANDREW HARNIK — THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Bill Christeson holds up his sign, “Follow the Money,” outside the Supreme Court on Thursday in Washington.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States