Supreme Court Rules in Trump Financial Records Cases
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
The Supreme Court today ruled in two cases related to President Trump’s financial records. Both cases were 7-2, with Justices Thomas and Alito dissenting in each. The parties will not get immediate access to Trump’s financial records in either case.
The Supreme Court in Trump v. Vance ruled 7-2 in favor of the New York district attorney, holding that a subpoena issued to a sitting president does not have to meet a heightened standard. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, with dissents from Justices Thomas and Alito. The Court rejected the notion that the president enjoys absolute immunity from State or local subpoenas. The Court remands the case for further proceedings.
In Trump v. Mazars, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the lower courts did not take adequate account of the separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President’s information. The court remands the case to lower courts to apply a more nuanced approach. Litigation over the congressional subpoenas seeking President Trump’s financial documents will continue, and the subpoenas will not be enforced now. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, with dissents from Justices Thomas and Alito.
You can read Trump v. Vance and Trump v. Mazars below:
