A federal judge ruled that former President Donald Trump‘s accountants will have to turn in two years’ worth of his tax records to a House committee investigating whether he and his businesses profited from his service in the executive branch.
On Wednesday, Amit Mehta, a judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, approved a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee subpoena for the former president’s records surrounding the years of 2017 and 2018 but rejected the panel’s request for similar information dating back to 2011.
“Such limited legislative need cannot justify the degree to which the Maloney Subpoena imposes on the separation of powers, even in the case of a former President,” Mehta, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, wrote.
TRUMP MOVES TO BLOCK EFFORT TO GET HIS TAX RETURNS AFTER DOJ GAVE GREEN LIGHT
“The more Congress can invade the personal sphere of a former President, the greater the leverage Congress would have on a sitting President,” Mehta argued.
Trump’s lawyers are likely to attempt to appeal the ruling, and the House panel could challenge the decision as well.
The ruling follows more than a year after the Supreme Court intervened in the case, overruling early wins for the House in lower courts and advising judges to be more careful about balancing the interest of the executive and legislative branches. While the Supreme Court ruled in July 2020 that the Manhattan district attorney could obtain Trump’s tax returns, Trump prevailed in a second case at the time, with the justices saying they would not allow Congress to obtain tax and financial records and kicking the issue back to the lower courts.
“How can we both protect the House’s interest in obtaining information it needs to legislate but also protect the presidency?” Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, posited during oral arguments last July.
The former president, who left office earlier this year, still enjoys some protections from congressional inquiries by virtue of his post-presidential position under the Supreme Court’s Mazars decision, in which the court maintained that the lower courts did not adequately consider whether congressional subpoenas requesting information from the president raise separation of powers concerns.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The Washington Examiner contacted House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney but did not immediately receive a response.
