HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Supreme Court ruling on T...

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 12:49 PM

Supreme Court ruling on Trump's tax returns, financial records to come Thursday

Source: Washington Post

The Supreme Court will announce Thursday whether congressional committees and a New York prosecutor are entitled to see President Trumpís personal financial records, after the president has waged an intense legal battle to keep the material secret.

The court said Wednesday that opinions in all remaining cases would be issued Thursday. The court in May held teleconferenced hearings ó with the world listening in ó on three cases with potential landmark constitutional consequences.

All concern Trumpís long-running legal fight to shield years of income tax returns from public view and keep his private financial records from the hands of Democratic-led House committees and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr.

The courtís decisions will carry major implications for the limits of presidential power and accountability, and could affect the fall election.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/supreme-court-ruling-on-trumps-tax-returns-financial-records-to-come-thursday/ar-BB16uooD?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=DELLDHP

23 replies, 1965 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply Supreme Court ruling on Trump's tax returns, financial records to come Thursday (Original post)
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jul 8 OP
usaf-vet Jul 8 #1
Miguelito Loveless Jul 8 #13
usaf-vet Jul 8 #14
WestMichRad Jul 8 #22
Bev54 Jul 8 #2
Wellstone ruled Jul 8 #3
bucolic_frolic Jul 8 #4
Thekaspervote Jul 8 #5
rsdsharp Jul 8 #6
Bayard Jul 8 #16
rsdsharp Jul 8 #17
cstanleytech Jul 8 #7
CaptainTruth Jul 8 #11
turbinetree Jul 8 #8
chriscan64 Jul 8 #9
Steelrolled Jul 8 #10
RT Atlanta Jul 8 #12
lagomorph777 Jul 8 #21
Faygo Kid Jul 8 #15
jcgoldie Jul 8 #18
CaptainTruth Jul 8 #19
diva77 Jul 8 #20
Senor Insomne Jul 8 #23

Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 12:54 PM

1. Why would the SCOTUS issue a ruling on birth control medication in the ACA if they intend to KILL IT

Makes no sense to me unless the are not going to kill the entire ACA - Obamacare. Of course, I'm not a lawyer or a SCOTUS expert.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to usaf-vet (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:27 PM

13. Because there was a case, and they have to issue a ruling

Also, they want to make sure that if the ACA is somehow resurrected, employers will have the power to decide what is covered and what isn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miguelito Loveless (Reply #13)


Response to usaf-vet (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 05:24 PM

22. The SCOTUS ACA case is scheduled for oral arguments in the fall term.

They won't be issuing a ruling on that case tomorrow.

Texas v. California, docket # 19-1019 was consolidated with California v. Texas, docket #19-840: see https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/california-v-texas/ for a summary of proceedings and orders to date.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 12:54 PM

2. Maybe

What are the chances they ask for the case to be reargued like they did with citizens united so they don't have to make a decision before the election. There seems to be a case of cowardice with this supreme court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 12:58 PM

3. So,Roberts is protection his Pal Donnie once again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:04 PM

4. No way they will force release of his tax returns

They don't want to wade into this brouhaha. Nor establish a precedent for suing the president. They will say Congress must pass a law.
And I doubt Roberts especially on this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:12 PM

5. Yup!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:35 PM

6. Congress DID pass a law in the 1920s to

address the Tea Pot Dome Scandal. The NY AG subpoena is part of a criminal investigation. It will be 5-4 in Trumpís favor anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsdsharp (Reply #6)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:38 PM

16. That's what i don't understand about this case

This has been established law for a very long time. WILL the Supremes uphold the law, is the big question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bayard (Reply #16)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:43 PM

17. It's possible, but this is just about the most

ideological court majority in history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:36 PM

7. Yup he will pass the buck once again in order to protect Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:22 PM

11. That would set a precedent that could seriously limit Congressional oversight.


For SCOTUS to rule against Congress it seems like they would have to invent some requirement for Congress to justify their oversight actions in some way, a requirement which is not in the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:55 PM

8. I wonder if Roberts and Trump will go golfing after tomorrow...............

just saying.....................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 01:57 PM

9. Trump works very hard

to hide the proof of his "innocence" and his "greatness" aka wealth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:12 PM

10. I would be happy for them to deny access to the records

You know that once Biden is in office, there will be non-stop investigations in retaliation

The trial in the Senate failed, let's move on and not make it worse for Biden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Steelrolled (Reply #10)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:23 PM

12. this is true - precedent setting

and we have to trust the SCt is cognizant of this fact

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Steelrolled (Reply #10)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 04:56 PM

21. We have to give Biden the House and Senate. Otherwise, Russiapublicans will Benghazi him to death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 02:34 PM

15. I PRAY we win 5-4. We need this.

It's all up to John Roberts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 03:03 PM

18. I think Roberts tries to thread the needle

I think he'll vote against Trump in the New York AG case and for him on congressional oversight. Its the only way he can keep from being seen as A. a complete partisan hack Trump stooge and B. a traitor to conservatives everywhere...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 03:15 PM

19. It seems like most folks are missing a very important aspect of one of these cases...

...the one concerning subpoenas to Mazars & Deutsche Bank et al.

That case is not about a president defying a congressional subpoena, SCOTUS already unanimously ruled in 1973 that the president (Nixon) has to comply with congressional subpoenas (& turn over the tapes).

That case is about congressional subpoenas going to 3rd parties (Mazars, Deutsche Bank, etc) & POTUS stepping in & trying to prevent 3rd parties from complying with those subpoenas.

To me that makes that case a VERY different animal, because if SCOTUS rules POTUS has the power to stop 3rd parties from complying with subpoenas, then POTUS can use that power to hide his own crimes, or the crimes of those in his administration, or family, or friends.

For example, say the president's brother shoots & kills someone. There are several witnesses, but the key piece of evidence is a convenience store surveillance video recording that clearly captured it all. Prosecutors subpoena the video recording. Does POTUS have the power to step in & prevent the convienence store (a 3rd party) from complying with the subpoena, in an effort to save his brother & his own reputation (POTUS desperately doesn't want the stigma of having a brother that's a convicted murderer)?

Yes, I know there are key differences between the actual case & my example, I chose it specifically to illustrate how dangerous it would be to give POTUS broad powers to block 3rd party subpoenas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 04:51 PM

20. It's always the worst-case scenario with all things Dump. Hard to have any expectations that

the SCOTUS rethuglican majority will do the right thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Wed Jul 8, 2020, 05:44 PM

23. Come on, Roberts!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread