Mazars looks like a win for Trump. Roberts writes another 7-2 (something of a trend in these final decisions). While the Court does not sign off on the Trump demands, it vacates the lower court decision. scotusblog.com/wp-content/upl…
..."The courts below did not take adequate account of the significant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President's information." Where Trump went too far in Trump v. Vance, the Congress may have been equally extreme in its demands here.
...Mazars finds that the lower courts were too dismissive of valid concerns over the possible intrusion of such congressional into executive areas. This will, like the New York case, go back to lower courts. This means that the cans get kicked down the road past the election.
If you are looking for a scoreboard, Trump v. Vance is a clear loss for the White House. Mazars rejects similarly absolute claims but it also finds that the White House was right on the failure for the courts to render a balanced inquiry on these issues.
In both cases, Trump's appointees (Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) correctly rejected the extreme arguments of privilege by the White House in both cases. Mazars could have been a win for Congress with a more tailored demand and a more balanced review.
An interesting twist will be the new Congress in January. These subpoenas will effectively die with the current Congress. That would require the district court to move with considerable dispatch if it will beat the clock on the expiration. That would be challenging.
...You could end up with undead subpoenas, alive only for the dwindling remainder of the congressional term but dead in terms of any schedule that includes trial practice and appeals. As I argued from the outset, I think Congress has the better argument but the worst schedule.
