Steve July 9, 2020
9 min ago

Supreme Court rulings buy Trump time, CNN legal analyst says

CNN legal analyst Joan Biskupic said the Supreme Court decisions today were a win for Tweety McTreason in terms of “the time he buys.”

Since the cases will be sent to lower courts for further review, it all but ensures that the President will be able to shield his financial documents from the public ahead of the November presidential election.

Biskupic added, however, that in the decision about the New York subpoena, there’s a “very strong case” that Trump will eventually have to turn over the tax records to a grand jury. 

Watch her full analysis:

13 min ago

If you’re just tuning in, here’s what you need to know about today’s SCOTUS rulings

The Supreme Court issued rulings in two cases related to Tweety McTreason’s financial records this morning.

If you’re just tuning in now, here’s what you need to know about the rulings:

  • The case about House subpoenas: The Supreme Court blocked House Democrats from accessing Trump’s financial records for now, sending the case back down to the lower court for further review.
  • The case about the New York subpoena: Justices ruled that the President is not immune from a subpoena for his financial documents from a New York prosecutor. This case was also sent to a lower court for further review.
  • What this means for Trump’s financial records: Since the cases will be handled at lower courts, it all but ensures that Trump’s financial documents — which he has long sought to protect — will not be handed over before the November presidential election.
  • How Trump is reacting: Trump has sent multiple tweets since the rulings were released. He claimed the court gave him a “delayed ruling” that they “never would have given” to another president. Remember: In both cases, both of Trump’s appointees — Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — joined the liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts on the 7-2 majorities.
35 min ago

Schumer on Supreme Court rulings: “Trump is not king”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer reacted to the Supreme Court’s rulings, saying the court today “upheld a fundamental tenet of our democracy that no one is above the law.”

Here’s the full statement:

“No matter how much he wishes it to be true, Tweety McTreason is not king. In a devastating blow to Tweety McTreason and his enablers in the Republican party, the Supreme Court today upheld a fundamental tenet of our democracy that no one is above the law.

Sadly, today’s rulings are a stark reminder that while Tweety McTreason is actively undermining our democracy, Senate Republicans and Attorney General Barr are not lifting a finger to stop him—something that is not lost on the American people.”

40 min ago

The Supreme Court also ruled on a case about Native land in Oklahoma today

From CNN’s Ariane de Vogue

As the Supreme Court handed down ruling on cases related to Tweety McTreason’s financial records, the justices also issued an opinion on a case about Native American land in Oklahoma.

The Supreme Court said the large swath of eastern Oklahoma — which including Tulsa — is Native American land for purposes of federal criminal law.

Justice Neil Gorsuch penned the 5-4 opinion joined by the liberals on the bench.

“Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law,” said Gorsuch, who was appointed by President Tweety McTreason. “Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word,” he said.

Under the law, crimes involving Native Americans on a reservation are under federal, not state, jurisdiction.

46 min ago

Another court rules that DC and Maryland attorney generals cannot subpoena Trump Organization now

From CNN’s Katelyn Polantz

Following the Supreme Court’s decision on Trump’s financial documents, other courts also ruled today on cases related to the President’s finances.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals said on Thursday that the DC and Maryland attorneys general can’t get documents under subpoena from the Trump Organization at this time, as it put on pause another major case about Trump’s business holdings.

The case, related to the Constitution’s emoluments clause, was another avenue where state-level leaders sought Trump financial information.

It is different from the cases the Supreme Court decided Thursday regarding congressional subpoenas and a state grand jury for Tweety McTreason’s tax returns.

The appeals court had revived the lawsuit by Maryland and the District of Columbia over the ownership of Trump’s hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, and had sent several subpoenas.

But the Justice Department is appealing to the Supreme Court on behalf of Trump.

52 min ago

What Supreme Court justices said in the case over House subpoenas

From CNN’s Ariane de Vogue 

House subpoenas for Tweety McTreason’s financial documents will remain blocked the Supreme Court said today, sending a controversial case back down to the lower court for further review.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the 7-2 opinion. Justices Thomas and Alito filed dissenting opinions. The President’s two nominees voted in the majority.

Here are some key quotes from the opinion:    

Justice John Roberts:

 “Congressional subpoenas for information from the President, however, implicate special concerns regarding the separation of powers. The courts below did not take adequate account of those concerns.”

He continued: “While we certainly recognize Congress’s important interests in obtaining information through appropriate inquiries, those interests are not sufficiently powerful to justify access to the President’s personal papers when other sources could provide Congress the information it needs.” 

Justice Clarence Thomas

“Congress’ legislative powers do not authorize it to engage in a nationwide inquisition with whatever resources it chooses to appropriate for itself. The majority’s solution—a nonexhaustive four-factor test of uncertain origin—is better than nothing. But the power that Congress seeks to exercise here has even less basis in the Constitution than the majority supposes. I would reverse in full because the power to subpoena private, nonofficial documents is not a necessary implication of Congress’ legislative powers. If Congress wishes to obtain these documents, it should proceed through the impeachment power.”

 Justice Samuel Alito:

“Whenever such a subpoena comes before a court, Congress should be required to make more than a perfunctory showing that it is seeking the documents for a legitimate legislative purpose and not for the purpose of exposing supposed Presidential wrongdoing.

He continued: “I agree that the lower courts erred and that these cases must be remanded, but I do not think that the considerations outlined by the Court can be properly satisfied unless the House is required to show more than it has put forward to date. Specifically, the House should provide a description of the type of legislation being considered, and while great specificity is not necessary, the description should be sufficient to permit a court to assess whether the particular records sought are of any special importance. The House should also spell out its constitutional authority to enact the type of legislation that it is contemplating, and it should justify the scope of the subpoenas in relation to the articulated legislative needs.”

1 hr 15 min ago

We will not see Tweety McTreason’s tax returns in 2020, CNN analyst says

From CNN’s Aditi Sangal

Following the Supreme Court ruling on a New York prosecutor’s request for Trump’s financial records, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said that Tweety McTreason’s tax returns will not be public in 2020.

“He’s kept his tax returns secret far longer than any presidential candidate in the modern history of presidential elections. That record will be intact in 2020,” Toobin says. ““That is something that was the calamity that was potentially at the end of this case for the President. It will not happen.”

“The public will not see his tax returns in 2020. That’s a victory,” he added.

What this is about: The justices ruled Tweety McTreason is not immune from New York’s subpoena, but that doesn’t mean prosecutors will not get documents now.

Despite a second Supreme Court ruling that blocks Congress from getting Trump’s records for now, Toobin says that the President still has reason to worry.

“If I’m Tweety McTreason, I’m also going to be thinking ‘You know win or lose, the Manhattan DA is not going away. This investigation is going to continue and I might get indicted in Manhattan.’”

“The decision in the [New York prosecutor] Cyrus Vance case really does suggest that these documents will be produced to the Grand Jury. Not immediately but eventually. If I’m the President, I’m not going to be happy about the idea that my financial documents will be before a grand jury, even if it’s not until after the 2020 election,” Toobin adds.

30 min ago

Pelosi: These rulings are “not good news for Tweety McTreason”

From CNN’s Lauren Fox and Manu Raju

Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said the Supreme Court’s rulings related to Tweety McTreason’s financial records are “not good news” for the President.

“A careful reading of the Supreme Court rulings related to the President’s financial records is not good news for Tweety McTreason,” she said in a statement.

About the rulings: Justices ruled Tweety McTreason is not immune from New York’s subpoena — but prosecutors will not get documents now.

They also blocked Congress from getting the President’s records for now, sending a controversial case back down to the lower court for further review.


1 hr 22 min ago

Bank holding some of Trump’s financial records reacts to SCOTUS decision

From CNN’s Erica Orden

Tweety McTreason’s financial documents will remain blocked for now, the Supreme Court ruled this morning, sending a controversial case back down to the lower court for further review.

The House had argued that it was seeking the President’s financial records from Mazars USA, Deutsche Bank and Capital One for the purpose of investigating whether Congress should amend federal conflict-of-interest and financial disclosure laws, as well as laws regulating banks.

Deutsche Bank reacted to the decision in a statement:   

“Deutsche Bank has demonstrated full respect for the US legal process and remained neutral throughout these proceedings. We will of course abide by a final decision by the courts,” Daniel Hunter, Deutsche Bank spokesperson, said.

Read More