The Supreme Court on Monday morning rejected a request by the House of Representatives to advance the timeline under which a ruling would be officially issued in a case on President Trump’s financial records, further delaying the search for House Democrats to obtain Trump documents.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor was the only justice on record who said she would grant the request, which House Democrats said was necessary because “[t]The Committee’s investigations are ongoing, remain urgent and have been hampered by the lack of purpose in these disputes, which began in April 2019. “The ruling will take effect on August 3, as originally scheduled.
The Supreme Court earlier this month essentially criticized the case for Trump’s financial records and returned it to lower courts with more guidance. If the Supreme Court agreed to “issue the judgments immediately” as requested by House Democrats, the proceedings in those lower courts could begin earlier.
POINTS OF THE SUPREME COURT, DENIES TO TRUMP IMMUNITY BUT BLOCKS DEMANDS OF DOCUMENTS
But it did not, forcing Democrats to wait a little longer to resume their efforts to access Trump’s financial records. The court ruling earlier this month essentially guaranteed that the archives would not see the light of day before the presidential election.
Court President John Roberts, in opinion on the case, said that while House committees seeking Trump’s documents have broad authority to monitor the executive branch, lower courts have not given sufficient importance to matters. important in the dispute between branches.
“When Congress seeks the information ‘necessary for smart legislative action,’ ‘it undoubtedly remains’ the duty of all citizens to cooperate,'” he wrote. But, Roberts said, congressional subpoenas to the president “involve special concerns regarding the separation of powers. The courts below did not adequately address those concerns.”
“The court has reaffirmed the authority of Congress to carry out oversight on behalf of the American people,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Said after the initial ruling on July 9, when she swore that the House “will continue to press our case in the lower courts.”
Pursuant to Supreme Court rules, the outcome of a case takes effect 25 days after you announce your ruling, which is the same amount of time you give litigants to file a request for a new hearing. In the case of Trump’s financial records, that will be on August 3. However, the term may be shortened by an individual judge, the court, or if the parties agree that the mandate takes effect earlier.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
That’s what happened in a similar case over Trump’s financial records, which Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance is trying to obtain with a criminal citation. Trump, who continues to fight the subpoena in lower courts but with arguments other than the full immunity statement that the Supreme Court rejected earlier this month, backed Vance’s request to “issue the judgments immediately” so that those procedures can start.
But Trump’s attorneys opposed the House request, which was probably the reason the Supreme Court granted one request and not the other.
“The House argument … that its ability to consider legislation is being compromised also sounds hollow,” Trump’s attorneys wrote. “As before, the Committees cannot identify any pending legislative proposals for which the President’s records are relevant, much less urgently needed. That is not surprising. There is no indication that the House is focused on these issues, let alone remotely close to passing legislation. “
