The Court’s recent rulings on state grand jury and congressional subpoenas identify important limitations on the purpose and scope of these investigative tools. Key Points: ..In July 2020, the Court held that the...more
In a companion case to Trump v. Vance, which I discussed in Part I, the Supreme Court, in Trump v. Mazars, rejected Trump and DOJ’s challenges to enforcement of congressional subpoenas for Trump’s financial records....more
In a decisive ruling, in Trump v. Vance, the Supreme Court rejected President Trump’s challenges to a New York State grand jury subpoena. In a 7-2 vote, The Supreme Court rejected the Trump Administration challenges....more
In last week’s decision in Trump v. Vance, the Supreme Court addressed for the first time whether a state District Attorney’s Office can issue a state criminal subpoena to a President. Relying on historical examples dating as...more
In yesterday’s decision in Trump v. Mazars, USA, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that Congress has the power to conduct investigations in support of its power to consider and enact legislation. However, it relied on historical...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued the following decisions: Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715; Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760: In April 2019, three United States House of Representatives’ committees...more
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715, holding that in assessing whether a congressional subpoena directed at personal information of the president is “related to, and in...more
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635, holding that President Donald Trump was required to respond to a state subpoena of his tax returns and other financial information because “Article...more