Thread by @renato_mariotti

THREAD: What do today's Supreme Court decisions about Trump's tax returns mean?

1/ Today the Supreme Court issued two opinions regarding Trump's tax returns. The first opinion considered whether he was immune from state court grand jury subpoenas or whether there was a heightened standard for him.

Trump lost that case 7 to 2. Link: supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf…

2/ It has long been established that presidents had to comply with *federal* grand jury subpoenas. Trump's attorneys argued that allowing "thousands of local DAs" investigate him would distract him too much from his duties.

The Supreme Court rejected that argument.

3/ Trump's attorneys also argued that state subpoenas would have to be subjected to a "heightened need" standard if they involved the president. The Supreme Court also rejected that argument, holding that he "stands in nearly the same situation with any other individual.”

4/ It is true that the Supreme Court found that Trump "may avail himself of the same protections available to every other citizen, including the right to challenge
the subpoena on any grounds permitted by state law, which usually include bad faith and undue burden or breadth."

5/ That does mean that Trump can continue to challenge the state subpoena, which was a grand jury subpoena from the Manhattan DA.

But the Manhattan DA conceded this point, which he had to do because *everyone* can raise these sorts of challenges.

6/ The Court also held that Trump can argue that a *specific* subpoena is merely "an attempt to influence the
performance of his official duties."

As a practical matter, that will be very hard to do here, given that the subpoena was to Trump's accountants, not him.

7/ The bottom line from this first decision is that Trump is not above the law and, aside from a specific challenge to a subpoena that is aimed to influence the performance of his duties, is "in nearly the same situation" any of us are in when we respond to a subpoena.

8/ The second decision concerned Congressional subpoenas issued by three separate House committees seeking Trump's tax returns pursuant to their oversight functions.

The decision here was less conclusive, but it was also a 7-2 decision. Link: supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf…

9/ The bottom line is that the Supreme Court sent these cases back down to the lower courts to consider " the significant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President’s information."

10/ The Supreme Court noted that past disputes involving information like this have been resolved by negotiation and compromise, not litigation.

Unlike the grand jury subpoena, which is investigating criminal activity, oversight subpoenas are part of a legislative process.

11/ These subpoenas are limited to those that have a “valid legislative purpose.”

Trump's lawyers proposed a heightened need test, which the Court again rejected.

The House essentially said that courts couldn't evaluate whether there was a valid purpose. That was also rejected.

12/ The Supreme Court set forth a balancing test that is a middle ground, requiring courts to consider various factors and ensuring that the subpoena was narrow and only focused on a legitimate legislative purpose.

13/ The Court's concern was that another political branch (Congress) could use subpoenas for political purposes, rather than to conduct genuine legislative activity.

As a practical matter, this means that the House subpoenas will be reevaluated by lower courts for months.

14/ It is true that these cases, taken together, give Trump the ability to litigate and delay production of his tax returns for months to come, essentially delaying their production until after the election.

But that was going to happen under any reasonably conceivable outcome.

15/ The Manhattan DA conceded that Trump, like any other citizen, could make further court challenges to the subpoenas.

As for the Congressional subpoenas, it was evident from the oral argument that they wouldn't conclude that the courts couldn't review Congressional subpoenas.

16/ As long as the courts could review whether there was a proper legislative purpose for the subpoenas, there was going to be some additional proceedings in the lower courts.

For that reason, by any measure, Trump lost in court today.

17/ Trump's lawyers made absurd arguments that were rejected by seven out of the nine Supreme Court justices, including two that he appointed.

The decisions, standing together, affirm the principle that the president is not above the law. That is a victory for all of us. /end