House, Trump lawyers clash in federal court

President asks judge to stop Congress from obtaining his financial records

WASHINGTON – Lawyers for President Donald Trump and the House clashed Tuesday in federal court over the extent of Congress’ power to investigate the president in the first legal test of Trump’s effort to block probes of his finances and private business.

Trump wants a judge to prevent a congressional committee from obtaining financial records from his longtime accountant, Mazars USA. It is the first court test of how much information the half-dozen committees conducting investigations of Trump and his businesses might be able to obtain.

Trump and his namesake businesses filed a lawsuit last month asking U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta to revoke a subpoena issued by the House Oversight and Reform Committee. Trump’s lawyers accused the Democratic-controlled committee of abusing their power and said there was no legislative purpose for the request.

Mehta cited three possible reasons Tuesday to block the subpoena: that Congress has no general authority to investigate the president’s private life, that it can’t investigate for the sake of exposure; and that Congress can’t encroach on the powers of the other two branches.

Mehta didn’t indicate whether he found those reasons sufficiently persuasive to block the House subpoena. But he suggested history might not be on the president’s side, saying courts had not found that Congress overstepped its subpoena authority since 1880 and questioning Trump’s lawyers about the basis for previous investigations of presidents.

Trump’s personal lawyer, William Consovoy, argued repeatedly that Congress was seeking the president’s financial information for what essentially is a law-enforcement purpose – which was outside its authority – rather than to work on legislation. The subpoena sought Trump’s financial records to look for inconsistencies in his financial disclosure forms, and whether he misstated his holdings for loans that could leave him beholden to foreigners.

“That is law enforcement,” Consovoy said. “Are you complying with federal law?”

At one point, Mehta asked whether Congress could investigate if the president was engaged in corrupt behavior.

“I don’t think that’s the proper subject of investigation as to the president,” Consovoy said, although executive agencies could be investigated.

Mehta sounded incredulous, asking whether Congress could have investigated Watergate, which led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation, and Whitewater, which led to President Bill Clinton’s impeachment. Consovoy initially said he’d have to look at the basis for those investigations.

“They were inquiring as to violations of criminal law,” Mehta said. “It’s pretty straightforward – among other things.”

Consovoy said the question is whether the legislation the committee cited was a valid reason for the subpoena.

But Douglas Letter, the general counsel for the House, argued that Congress has broad investigative authority.

“His main client, President Trump, has taken the position really that Congress and particularly the House of Representatives is a nuisance and we’re just getting in his way when he’s trying to run the country,” Letter said. “The problem with that is that this is a total and basic and fundamental misunderstanding of the system that is set up by the Constitution.”

Letter acknowledged under questioning by Mehta that hypothetically Congress might overstep by asking for the president’s blood or for his diary as a 7-year-old. But Letter said Trump’s suit is so far outside the bounds of past high court decisions that he has “no chance for success” and urged a quick decision because of Congress’ limited term.

“President Trump has taken the position really that Congress and particularly the House of Representatives is a nuisance and we’re just getting in his way when he’s trying to run the country.”

Douglas Letter General counsel for the House of Representatives