Trump financial documents
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday morning heard oral arguments from President Donald Trump’s House of Representatives over financial documents.
The Supreme Court upheld Trump v. Mazar USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, two issues that arose from House Democrats’ attempts to discredit Trump’s financial records when he was a private citizen. ۔ The focus is on whether Congress has the authority to obtain such information.
The Chief Justice guided the oral argument in the new virtual format, turning to the time for every justice to ask the lawyers questions.
Trump’s lawyers say all congressional vice-presidents harass the president and undermine his ability to carry out his constitutional duties. At one point during Tuesday morning’s oral argument, Justice Elena Kagan categorically questioned whether her duties would be compromised by a sub-grant. Trump’s lawyers responded that this would change the balance of power. He also noted that those who undermined the presidency would have a lasting effect.
The House of Representatives House Democrats support all side efforts to ensure that petitions are in the hands of the Legislative Branch. Basically, lawyers argue that bylaws serve the purpose of a legitimate legislation. In a significant exchange, Justice Samuel Allelo suggested that imposing this standard on supplementary petitions does not provide any protection to the president, as each petition may have some legislative purpose. The lawyer replied that the power of Congress to legislate is very wide.
The decision could have an impact on the 2020 presidential election, as Democrats are getting information about Trump’s tax returns even before the election.