The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => SCOTUS News => Topic started by: mystery-ak on July 09, 2020, 02:15:21 pm
-
just breaking
SCOTUSblog
@SCOTUSblog
·
1m
In Trump v. Vance, #SCOTUS hands President Trump a defeat in battle with NY district attorney, holding that a subpoena to a sitting president does not have to meet a heightened standard
Robert Barnes
@scotusreporter
·
1m
BREAKING: By 7-2 vote, Scotus says Trump can't block subpoena of NY district attorney
-
Tom Winter
@Tom_Winter
·
25s
NEW: By a 7-2 vote the Supreme Court says the President is not "absolutely immune" from a subpoena and so the Manhattan D.A. will now likely get President Trump's tax documents.
-
Mark Pantano
@TheMarkPantano
·
1m
BREAKING: Supreme Court rules that President is not absolutely immune. Criminal prosecutor can subpoena his tax records.
BUT.. the President can challenge the specifics of this particular subpoena.
The case is remanded to lower court for further consideration.
-
The Associated Press
@AP
·
4m
BREAKING: Supreme Court rules Manhattan district attorney can obtain Trump tax returns. A ruling on whether Congress can get access is coming next.
-
Supreme Court Says NY Grand Jury Can Get Trump Tax Returns
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a New York grand jury can subpoena President Trump's tax returns.
The 7-2 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, says "Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President."
This is a developing story.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/supreme-court-expect-to-rule-whether-manhattan-da-congress-can-see-trump-tax-records/2507122/ (https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/supreme-court-expect-to-rule-whether-manhattan-da-congress-can-see-trump-tax-records/2507122/)
-
Mark Pantano
@TheMarkPantano
·
1m
BREAKING: Supreme Court rules that President is not absolutely immune. Criminal prosecutor can subpoena his tax records.
BUT.. the President can challenge the specifics of this particular subpoena.
The case is remanded to lower court for further consideration.
This part is headed back to the Supreme Court.
-
The Supreme Court on Thursday voted 7-2 against President Donald Trump in a case over whether he could shield his tax records from the Manhattan district attorney.
Chief Justice John Roberts authored the court’s opinion, which was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch wrote separately to explain their votes with the majority. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
“In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence.’ Since the earliest days of the Republic, ‘every man’ has included the President of the United States,†Roberts wrote.
The decision is the first time that the nation’s highest court has directly ruled on a matter involving Trump’s personal dealings. Trump has been more secretive with his finances than any president in decades, refusing to release his tax records to the public even as he mounts a bid for reelection.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/09/supreme-court-trump-tax-records.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/09/supreme-court-trump-tax-records.html)
-
Ha
SCOTUS blocks Congress from getting Trump's tax records...sends back to lower court
-
John Roberts
@johnrobertsFox
·
34s
1-1 for @realDonaldTrump
at @USSupremeCourt
. SCOTUS gives NY A-G a green light to subpoena Trump financial records. Congress is told it can't have POTUS' tax returns
-
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
Trump v. Vance is a 7-2 decision by CJ Roberts. As many of us argued, Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not contain an exclusion or higher standard for state criminal subpoenas for a sitting President.
-
Amendment IV, United States Constitution
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
-
John Roberts
@johnrobertsFox
·
34s
1-1 for @realDonaldTrump
at @USSupremeCourt
. SCOTUS gives NY A-G a green light to subpoena Trump financial records. Congress is told it can't have POTUS' tax returns
Of course SCOTUS knows damn well CNN will have the returns as fast as the NY AG has them.
-
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
As I argued in the past, the President helped to create more binding precedent against future presidents with extreme constitutional claims. This bought time for Trump but at the cost of countervailing precedent. It will push the matter beyond the election but at a high cost.
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
11m
Replying to
@JonathanTurley
There is no spin possible. This is a major and embarrassing defeat for the President who, against the advice of many of us, advanced an unsustainable claim of absolute privilege.
-
Of course SCOTUS knows damn well CNN will have the returns as fast as the NY AG has them.
Yep...
-
Mazars looks like a win for Trump. Roberts writes another 7-2 (something of a trend in these final decisions). While the Court does not sign off on the Trump demands, it vacates the lower court decision. https://t.co/dy2RNsWbvm— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) July 9, 2020
-
Andrew Pollack
@AndrewPollackFL
·
5m
I do not care about President @realDonaldTrump
’s tax returns.
I care about how Joe Biden spent four decades in public office enriching his family and friends!
-
Steve Deace
@SteveDeaceShow
·
4m
Trump's own SCOTUS nominees turn on him, which means we can only look forward to Mike Pence self-parody tweeting out once more later today "that's why we need to vote Republican for better judges."
-
Andrew Pollack
@AndrewPollackFL
·
5m
I do not care about President @realDonaldTrump
’s tax returns.
I care about how Joe Biden spent four decades in public office enriching his family and friends!
:yowsa: pointing-up
The problem is that he is not the only one by far! Both sides of the isle.
-
Mazars finds that the lower courts were too dismissive of valid concerns over the possible intrusion of such congressional into executive areas. This will, like the New York case, go back to lower courts. This means that the cans get kicked down the road past the election.
-
Andrew Desiderio
@AndrewDesiderio
In sum: Trump’s financial records—all of them—will remain sealed at least through Election Day.
Trump indeed lost the Manhattan DA case, badly. But those records are subject to grand-jury secrecy, so the public won't see them.
Congressional subpoena cases on hold pending remand
-
Andrew Pollack
@AndrewPollackFL
·
5m
I do not care about President @realDonaldTrump
’s tax returns.
I care about how Joe Biden spent four decades in public office enriching his family and friends!
So ....where are the subpoenas for Biden's tax records? I want to see them. And I'm betting that there is actually criminality connected with Biden's, rather than Trump's.
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
3m
The Supreme Court sends case back to Lower Court, arguments to continue. This is all a political prosecution. I won the Mueller Witch Hunt, and others, and now I have to keep fighting in a politically corrupt New York. Not fair to this Presidency or Administration!
-
David Corn
@DavidCornDC
·
1m
Bottom line on these 7-2 SCOTUS decisions: Trump cannot be an autocrat who just says no to subpoenas from Congress and local DAs. But he can argue the particulars of individual subpoenas, and now these requests for his financial records & tax returns go back to lower courts.
-
Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
·
1m
McCarthy: The Supreme Court made a decision. I’ve watched Trump abide by all the requests for financial disclosure which are much more thorough than any tax returns. The request from district attorney of NY..seems like it’s much more political than anything else
-
Lanny Davis
@LannyDavis
·
1m
3/5 Please don’t forget @MichaelCohen212
published financial statements from @realDonaldTrump
proving that he fraudulently inflated his assets to get bank loans and deflated the same assets to reduce his taxes. Everyone saw those financial statements thanks to @MichaelCohen212
-
Ordinarily, the Democrats would be opening a very nasty can of worms which could sink them.
However, these days 'law' only applies to Republicans and Democrats are exempt.
So they are doing this because they are confident that it will never be applied to themselves. And even if it is somehow, their cadre of servant 'Judges' would overturn it.
-
So ....where are the subpoenas for Biden's tax records? I want to see them. And I'm betting that there is actually criminality connected with Biden's, rather than Trump's.
Let's start with Hunter's. :smokin:
-
Lisa Desjardins
@LisaDNews
·
16m
SCOTUS seems to suggest a 4-pronged test when Congress subpoenas POTUS docs:
1. The legislative purpose must warrant it
2. Subpoena must be as narrow as possible to meet Congress' need
3. Congress must give "detailed" evidence
4. Check for political rivalry/sep of power issues
-
Of course SCOTUS knows damn well CNN will have the returns as fast as the NY AG has them.
It's going to be a while before Manhattan sees anything. The Supremes sent this back to the lower court and basically instructed Trump to challenge each subpoena ... So we're all going to be back in the Supreme Court on this one.
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The Supreme Court sends case back to Lower Court, arguments to continue. This is all a political prosecution. I won the Mueller Witch Hunt, and others, and now I have to keep fighting in a politically corrupt New York. Not fair to this Presidency or Administration!
10:38 AM · Jul 9, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1281236214646034432
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcffPdwWoAAxB3D?format=png&name=small)
-
Mark R. Levin
@marklevinshow
1. The Supreme Court just opened itself up to congressional demands for the individual justices' tax returns.
2. I can see a situation in which the House or the Senate decides that it must have access to all of the justices' tax and financial records each year to determine if they're influences in any way to write the decisions they write or vote the way they vote on numerous cases.
3. The justices will not be able to argue that they are immune as a matter of separation of powers as they just shot down that argument as applies to the president.
10:50 AM · Jul 9, 2020·Twitter for Android
https://twitter.com/marklevinshow/status/1281239236293861378
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
We have a totally corrupt previous Administration, including a President and Vice President who spied on my campaign, AND GOT CAIGHT...and nothing happens to them. This crime was taking place even before my election, everyone knows it, and yet all are frozen stiff with fear....
9:46 AM · Jul 9, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
....No Republican Senate Judiciary response, NO “JUSTICEâ€, NO FBI, NO NOTHING. Major horror show REPORTS on Comey & McCabe, guilty as hell, nothing happens. Catch Obama & Biden cold, nothing. A 3 year, $45,000,000 Mueller HOAX, failed - investigated everything....
9:46 AM · Jul 9, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
2.3K
Retweets and comments
7K
Likes
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
14m
Replying to
@realDonaldTrump
....Won all against the Federal Government and the Democrats send everything to politically corrupt New York, which is falling apart with everyone leaving, to give it a second, third and fourth try. Now the Supreme Court gives a delay ruling that they would never have given...
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
14m
....for another President. This is about PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT. We catch the other side SPYING on my campaign, the biggest political crime and scandal in U.S. history, and NOTHING HAPPENS. But despite this, I have done more than any President in history in first 3 1/2 years!
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
We have a totally corrupt previous Administration, including a President and Vice President who spied on my campaign, AND GOT CAIGHT...and nothing happens to them. This crime was taking place even before my election, everyone knows it, and yet all are frozen stiff with fear....
....No Republican Senate Judiciary response, NO “JUSTICEâ€, NO FBI, NO NOTHING. Major horror show REPORTS on Comey & McCabe, guilty as hell, nothing happens. Catch Obama & Biden cold, nothing. A 3 year, $45,000,000 Mueller HOAX, failed - investigated everything....
....Won all against the Federal Government and the Democrats send everything to politically corrupt New York, which is falling apart with everyone leaving, to give it a second, third and fourth try. Now the Supreme Court gives a delay ruling that they would never have given...
....for another President. This is about PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT. We catch the other side SPYING on my campaign, the biggest political crime and scandal in U.S. history, and NOTHING HAPPENS. But despite this, I have done more than any President in history in first 3 1/2 years!
10:46 AM · Jul 9, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1281238367464808454
-
John Santucci
@Santucci
·
5m
Jay Sekulow: “We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress & NY prosecutors from obtaining the President’s tax records. We will now proceed to raise additional Constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.â€
-
John Solomon
@jsolomonReports
·
3m
BREAKING: Supreme Court hands Trump win, blocks Congress from getting his tax returns for now | Just The News
-
Of course SCOTUS knows damn well CNN will have the returns as fast as the NY AG has them.
THIS ^^^^^
-
Lost in all this kerfuffle is precedence setting of any radical organization, state, local government, or whatever being able secure a copy of your 1040, based on any alleged legal need.
This shit better not happen.
-
John Santucci
@Santucci
·
5m
Jay Sekulow: “We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress & NY prosecutors from obtaining the President’s tax records. We will now proceed to raise additional Constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.â€
And yet.... the idiot leftists are painting this as a major defeat by Trump. Lying liars lie.
-
Jay Sekulow
@JaySekulow
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 financial records. We will now proceed to raise additional Constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.
8:02 AM · Jul 9, 2020
https://twitter.com/JaySekulow/status/1281242394323755008
Finally! Someone agrees with me. :yowsa:
-
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
Trump v. Vance is a 7-2 decision by CJ Roberts. As many of us argued, Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not contain an exclusion or higher standard for state criminal subpoenas for a sitting President.
Vance has all the time he needs to go after Trump’s taxes all the way back in 2016. It’s not like there are any murder, arson, looting, rape, assault cases in New York City to get in the way of an investigation into charity donations; now that’s important.
-
Finally! Someone agrees with me. :yowsa:
Sekulow will tie this up in courts for years... :pop41:
-
Finally! Someone agrees with me. :yowsa:
[/quote
This is a political hack witch hunt, Im with Trump 100% on this.
-
Sekulow will tie this up in courts for years... :pop41:
Yet ALL the headlines still read "Supreme Court grants NY prosecutors access to Trump's tax returns" A blatant LIE!
-
Yet ALL the headlines still read "Supreme Court grants NY prosecutors access to Trump's tax returns" A blatant LIE!
It's infuriating, but not unexpected.
-
READ: Trump v. Vance Supreme Court ruling
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/506541-read-trump-v-vance-supreme-court-ruling
-
It's infuriating, but not unexpected.
And the result of this blatant lying on the public perception will be...?
-
SUPREME COURT SATISFIES NEITHER TRUMP NOR HIS ENEMIES IN FINANCIAL RECORDS CASES
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/supreme-court-satisfies-neither-trump-nor-his-enemies-in-financial-records-cases.php (https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/supreme-court-satisfies-neither-trump-nor-his-enemies-in-financial-records-cases.php)
The congressional attempt to obtain Trump’s financial records came to a head in Trump v. Mazars, USA.. Three committees of the U. S. House issued four subpoenas seeking information about the finances of President Trump, his children, and affiliated businesses. Each committee made the transparently pretextual claim that the records it sought would help guide legislative reform in areas ranging from money laundering and terrorism to foreign involvement in U. S. elections.
Various federal courts agreed, and ordered compliance with the subpoenas.
The Supreme Court reversed and remanded. It found that the lower courts did not take adequate account of the significant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the president’s information. On remand, the courts must take account of these concerns.
...
Chief Justice Roberts writing for a majority that included all four Justices nominated by Democratic presidents, explained that the House’s approach would leave essentially no limits on the congressional power to subpoena the president’s personal records. A limitless subpoena power could transform the established practice of the political branches and allow Congress to aggrandize itself at the President’s expense.
Roberts noted that these separation of powers concerns are unmistakably implicated by the subpoenas here, which represent not a run-of-the-mill legislative effort but rather a clash between rival branches of government over records of intense political interest for all involved. The interbranch conflict does not vanish simply because the subpoenas seek personal papers or because the President sued in his personal capacity.
-
So will someone go to prison when the returns are illegally leaked to the press?
-
So will someone go to prison when the returns are illegally leaked to the press?
Are you kidding? They'll set up a Woodward and Bernstein "Deep Throat". Leaker with 10X the secrecy and security. Guy will be tougher to find than the Unibomber was.
-
The upshot of today's two decisions is that the Supreme Court thoroughly rebuffed Trump's most sweeping assertion of executive power while also casting doubt on the House Oversight Committee's broad claim of congressional power.
---Damon Root [author of Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1137279230/reasonmagazineA/) (Palgrave Macmillan)], Reason, from "Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh Reject Trump's Assertion of 'Absolute Immunity' From State Criminal Subpoenas. (https://reason.com/2020/07/09/roberts-gorsuch-kavanaugh-reject-trumps-assertion-of-absolute-immunity-from-state-criminal-subpoenas/)"
Also from that article:
Trump lost big in Trump v. Vance. At issue was a subpoena filed by the New York County District Attorney's Office seeking financial records from Mazars USA, LLP, the longtime accounting firm of both Trump and various businesses tied to him. Trump's lawyers told the Supreme Court that the president should enjoy "absolute immunity" from such state legal actions while in office. As the Court put it, Trump "argues that the Supremacy Clause gives a sitting President absolute immunity from state criminal subpoenas because compliance with those subpoenas would categorically impair a President's performance of his Article II functions."
The Supreme Court resoundingly rejected that position. "Two hundred years ago, a great jurist of our Court established that no citizen, not even the President, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding," declared the majority opinion (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-635_o7jq.pdf) of Chief Justice John Roberts. "We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need." In other words, the Manhattan district attorney may ultimately obtain Trump's financial records . . .
. . . Trump fared a little better in today's second subpoena case. At issue in Trump v. Mazars was an effort by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform to obtain eight years of Trump's financial records from his accounting firm. The key question was whether the congressional committee had a "legitimate legislative purpose" in seeking those documents . . . That argument seemed to resonate with the Court . . . But the majority stopped short of actually ruling in Trump's favor. In fact, the justices essentially punted the case back down to the lower courts . . .
-
I hope people here understand that “Trump's most sweeping assertion of executive power†was an assertion the Trump legal team made deliberately knowing that it wouldn’t fly, but would accomplish delaying a district court ruling until after the election when its political impact would be mooted by a Trump victory.