Judge Blocks New California Law That Would Force Trump to Reveal Tax Returns
The tentative ruling followed a two-hour hearing over a request by President Donald Trump's campaign and Republicans at the state and federal level for a preliminary injunction.
September 19, 2019 at 05:19 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
In a snap ruling from the bench, U.S. District Judge Morrison England of the Eastern District of California on Thursday temporarily blocked a new California law requiring presidential candidates to disclose five years of tax returns to appear on the 2020 primary ballot.
The tentative ruling followed a free-wheeling, two-hour hearing over a request by President Donald Trump's campaign and Republicans at the state and federal level for a preliminary injunction. Lawyers arguing the case were preparing to leave the courtroom at the end of arguments when England told everyone to wait and then announced how he intended to rule.
England did not offer specific reasons for his initial decision but said he would issue a final ruling by Oct. 1. He said the timeline would allow attorneys on both sides to prepare for an inevitable appeal. The case is one of several in courts around the country where Trump is fighting to keep his financial information secret. On Thursday, Trump's lawyers sued New York prosecutors to stop their demands for eight years of tax returns.
England had peppered lawyers for California with questions about the law, which, while applying to presidential and gubernatorial candidates, was openly aimed by California leaders at Trump, who has refused to reveal his taxes. Trump, defying modern custom of presidential candidates releasing tax returns, has blamed an ongoing audit. But critics contend nothing would stop him from disclosing his tax returns.
The judge questioned whether California's law is preempted by federal law, the Ethics in Government Act, that requires certain financial disclosures by presidential candidates. He also expressed doubt about the law's compliance with the Constitution's qualifications clause and suggested allowing California to set specific standards for candidates would lead to "a hodge podge" of different requirements by states.
Harmeet Dhillon, one of seven attorneys who appeared for plaintiffs in five consolidated cases, said she was pleased with the ruling but "until I get that hot final document, whatever it is, in my hands, I'm not going to count my chickens."
England did ask lawyers for Trump and other Republicans whether the state did not have a genuine interest in providing a candidate's information to voters. Consovoy McCarthy partner Thomas McCarthy, representing the president and his campaign, called the requirement a "severe burden" to candidates and those considering running for office. McCarthy quoted former California Gov. Jerry Brown, who vetoed a previous version of the bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom this year, calling it a bad precedent.
Democratic State Senator Mike McGuire, the author of the legislation, said in an email statement Thursday afternoon that the judge's decision was "perplexing, premature and not necessary."
"We're way out in front of any deadline required under the law and the irreparable harm argument is simply not apparent," McGuire said. "I think the judge got this one wrong and a decision as important as this should not have been rushed or the law prematurely shut down."
California leaders, unveiling and touting the new law over the summer, said leading constitutional law scholars and practitioners were supporting the measure.
"No other constitutional provision is implicated or violated by a state's requirement that a Presidential candidate disclose tax returns," David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner said in a statement in July. "Moreover, California, which permits electors to be chosen by popular vote, has an important interest in insuring that its voters are informed."
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's Theodore Boutrous, a regular Trump critic who has sued the White House over media access, said the law applied across the board to any presidential candidate, not just Trump.
Read more:
Calif. High Court Holds Off Ruling on Law Forcing Trump to Hand Over Tax Returns
California Defends New Law Requiring Candidates to Disclose Tax Returns
Boies and Boutrous Back California's Squeeze on Trump's Tax Returns
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
© 2025 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 AllLitigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Litigators of the Week: A Win for Homeless Veterans On the VA's West LA Campus
'The Most Peculiar Federal Court in the Country' Comes to Berkeley Law
Trending Stories
- 1Chief Judge Joins Panel Exploring Causes for Public's Eroding Faith in NY Legal System
- 2Pogo Stick Maker Wants Financing Company to Pay $20M After Bailing Out Client
- 3Goldman Sachs Secures Dismissal of Celebrity Manager's Lawsuit Over Failed Deal
- 4Trump Moves to Withdraw Applications to Halt Now-Completed Sentencing
- 5Trump's RTO Mandate May Have Some Gov't Lawyers Polishing Their Resumes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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