U.S. Supreme Court decides to release Trump declarations - ForumDaily
The article has been automatically translated into English by Google Translate from Russian and has not been edited.
Переклад цього матеріалу українською мовою з російської було автоматично здійснено сервісом Google Translate, без подальшого редагування тексту.
Bu məqalə Google Translate servisi vasitəsi ilə avtomatik olaraq rus dilindən azərbaycan dilinə tərcümə olunmuşdur. Bundan sonra mətn redaktə edilməmişdir.

U.S. Supreme Court decides to release Trump declarations

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, July 9, ruled that U.S. President Donald Trump is not immune to subpoenas from the Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance in connection with his financial statements and tax returns. The court also refused to make a final decision on whether Congressional committees can have access to Trump's financial documents. The Supreme Court sent both questions to the lower courts. Writes about it Fox News.

Photo: Shutterstock

The decision was made under the direction of Supreme Court President John Roberts.

Vance demanded that Trump's financial records be provided as part of a criminal investigation into a possible violation by the president and his organization. Several House committees have also requested documents. Both decisions were taken in a ratio of 7-2.

“The President is absolutely not immune from criminal subpoenas,” John Roberts wrote in his opinion in the New York case. — The court limited its decision and the arguments it had to whether Trump has “absolute immunity” and whether government prosecutors must demonstrate a “great need” to obtain documents as part of investigations into the president.

Roberts wrote that the president “may put forward additional arguments as appropriate” in the lower courts in an attempt to deter Vance from receiving documents.

Roberts, among other things, is the author of the opinion on the cases of the House of Representatives, which were combined. In one of them, the House Control Committee summoned the accounting firm Mazars USA in connection with access to a number of Trump financial documents from 2011 to 2018, including personal records, as well as records of various subsidiaries and organizations. These included the long-sought tax returns of the president.

In the second case, the House Financial Services and Intelligence Committees sought documents from Deutsche Bank, and the House Financial Services Committee sought documents from Capital One. While both banks have various financial records related to Trump and his businesses, neither has the president's tax returns.

"Without limits on its subpoena power, Congress could 'exercise imperious control' over the executive branch," Roberts wrote.

But Roberts also left open the possibility that Democrats of the House of Representatives, after further proceedings in lower courts, would be able to receive presidential declarations.

On the subject: US Supreme Court changes presidential voting system

“When Congress requests reasonably necessary information, it certainly obliges all citizens to cooperate,” he said. But, he said, subpoenas from Congress to the president “imply special concerns about the separation of powers. The courts that previously considered these claims did not take into account this problem.”

In the long term, the resolutions are a partial victory for the president, because he will not have to immediately provide declarations on the eve of the presidential elections. But neither decision rules out the possibility that the president will eventually have to grant them.

“We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress and the New York City Attorney's Office from obtaining the President's tax records,” Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow said. “We will now proceed to address additional constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.”

Meanwhile, Vance declared victory.

“This is a huge victory for our nation's justice system and its founding principle that no one, not even the president, is above the law,” he said. “Our investigation, delayed for nearly a year, will resume as always, guided by a solemn commitment to follow the law and the facts wherever they lead.”

Note: the Democrats stated that they were satisfied with the decision on their case.

“The Court has affirmed Congress's authority to exercise oversight on behalf of the American people,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, and vowed that the House would “continue to press the case in the lower courts.”

Trump himself clearly expressed his dissatisfaction with the decisions in a few tweets.

“The Supreme Court sends the case back to the lower court. This is all political persecution. I won the Mueller witch hunt and others. Now I must continue to fight in politically corrupt New York,” Trump wrote.

Vance, in the case of New York, stated in his summary that “he is writing a summons to search for declarations, from 2011 to the present, for operations that are not related to any official actions of the president, and which occurred in mainly before the applicant accepted the post of head of the White House. ”

He also noted that among the potential criminal issues, due to which the president is under investigation, there are “bribes”. Allegedly, he gave them to women with whom he had novels, which perhaps equates to a violation of the financing of the presidential campaign.

Trump's personal lawyers in the criminal case made a broad argument about the level of immunity that the president enjoys during his tenure.

On the subject: US Supreme Court Decides Fate of 'Dreamers': What Will Be DACA Program

“Under Article II, the Supremacy Clause and the general structure of our Constitution, the President of the United States cannot be 'subject to criminal trial' while in office,” the lawyers said.

Trump's lawyers also argued that allowing prosecutors (especially local ones) to investigate and potentially institute criminal proceedings against presidential steps essentially gave them the power to force the chief executive to pursue their privileged policies; and that the threat of prosecution related to subpoenas could distract the president from his duties.

Judge Clarence Thomas in both cases opposed the adoption of such decisions by the Supreme Court. Regarding subpoenas to the House of Representatives, he argued that Congress could only receive the personal documents that he requested from the president in the context of the impeachment investigation, and not his standard tax returns.

“I would say that Congress does not have the power to issue a legislative subpoena for private non-official documents—whether they belong to the president or not,” he said.

Judge Samuel Alito also disagreed with the court decision, but took a milder approach than Thomas, saying that "such summons are not categorically prohibited," the House of Representatives inadequately illustrated their legislative needs for subpoenas.

“Legislative subpoenas for presidential records are inherently suspect,” he said, arguing that such documents “rarely have any particular value in a case.”

The remaining seven judges, including Trump appointees Brett Cavanaugh and Neil Gorsuh, joined the majority of Roberts in a lawsuit by the House of Representatives. As for the New York jury, four liberal judges joined Roberts, while Cavanaugh and Gorsukha were opposed.

Read also on ForumDaily:

'Arrogant sociopath threatening the country': what the scandalous book of his niece told about Trump

US Supreme Court changes presidential voting system

City of refuge for statues and the 'Park of American Heroes': how the USA is trying to save monuments

Putin until 2036: in which countries the presidential terms were reset to zero and what did it lead to

The court overturned one of the most stringent Trump rules for asylum seekers in the US

Miscellanea In the U.S. Donald Trump US Supreme Court
Subscribe to ForumDaily on Google News

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis. 



 
1082 requests in 1,145 seconds.