DC Circuit's Rao, Millett and Tatel Will Hear Trump Subpoena Case July 12
The hearing will mark the first time an appellate panel will scrutinize a subpoena seeking Trump-related financial records.
May 23, 2019 at 03:29 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A Washington federal appeals panel will hear argument July 12 in the fight over a congressional subpoena that seeks financial records from the president's longtime accounting firm.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued an order in the case on Thursday. Judges Patricia Millett, David Tatel and Neomi Rao will hear the dispute.
Lawyers for Donald Trump and the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday had asked the appeals court to expedite its review of the subpoena. Under this arrangement, the House agreed to pause its demand for the production of documents from Trump's accountant.
The hearing, which the court will broadcast through a live-stream online, as it does with all of its arguments, will mark the first time an appellate panel will have a chance to scrutinize a subpoena seeking Trump-related financial records. The judges set a briefing schedule that ends on July 9.
The three-judge panel—Tatel, Millett and Rao—represent appointees across three presidential administrations. Rao joined the court a few weeks ago from the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, a key regulatory agency; Millett was an appellate partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld when Barack Obama appointed her in 2013; and Tatel has served on the court since 1994.
Tatel and Millett are fairly active on the bench, peppering lawyers who appear before them. The July hearing will be Rao's fourth as a D.C. Circuit judge. She made her debut on the bench on May 3, presiding over, among other cases, an environmental regulatory dispute.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta of the District of Columbia on Monday ruled Trump and his businesses have no lawful ground to block the House Oversight Committee subpoena that was served on the accounting firm Mazars USA LLP. Mazars, represented by a team from Blank Rome, has not taken a position on the demand for records.
“Courts have grappled for more than a century with the question of the scope of Congress's investigative power,” Mehta said in his ruling. “The binding principle that emerges from these judicial decisions is that courts must presume Congress is acting in furtherance of its constitutional responsibility to legislate and must defer to congressional judgments about what Congress needs to carry out that purpose.”
A similar fight over Trump's financial information is unfolding in New York. Trump's attorneys had asked a New York federal court to block a House Oversight Committee subpoena seeking records from Deutsche Bank and Capital One. U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos of the Southern District of New York, heard arguments Wednesday afternoon and ruled against Trump. Ramos, like Mehta, also denied to stay enforcement of the subpoena pending Trump's appeal.
Trump is being represented by attorneys at Consovoy McCarthy Park. The firm Michael Best & Friedrich represents The Trump Organization and the president's other business entities.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDaily Dicta: Under-the-Radar Fight Over Jones Day Memos Could Sharply Undercut Attorney-Client Privilege
Daily Dicta: When You Cheat on an Ethics Test, You Know You've Got Problems, KPMG Edition
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250