WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court is expected to rule Thursday on whether Congress and the Manhattan district attorney can see President Donald Trump's taxes and other financial records that the president has fought hard to keep private.
The high-stakes dispute tests the balance of power between the White House and Congress, as well as Trump's claim that he can't be investigated while he holds office.
It's not clear, even if Trump loses, how much of the material would become public, since some records would go to a confidential grand-jury investigation in New York and the rest, sought by committees of the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, could contain highly sensitive information not just about Trump, but also about other members of his family and businesses.
Trump has so far lost at every step, but the records have not been turned over pending a final court ruling.
The case was argued by telephone in May because of the coronavirus pandemic. The court said Wednesday that all remaining cases would be decided Thursday. A dispute over whether a large chunk of eastern Oklahoma remains Indian land, also argued in May, is the only other outstanding case.
The fight over the congressional subpoenas has significant implications regarding a president’s power to refuse a formal request from Congress. In a separate fight at the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., over a congressional demand for the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn, the administration is making broad arguments that the president’s close advisers are “absolutely immune” from having to appear.
In two earlier cases over presidential power, the Supreme Court acted unanimously in requiring President Richard Nixon to turn over White House tapes to the Watergate special prosecutor and in allowing a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton to go forward.
In those cases, three Nixon appointees and two Clinton appointees, respectively, voted against the president who chose them for the high court. A fourth Nixon appointee, William Rehnquist, sat out the tapes case because he had worked closely as a Justice Department official with some of the Watergate conspirators whose upcoming trial spurred the subpoena for the Oval Office recordings.