In Trump Tax Returns Case, Lawyers at Odds Over Next Steps
"Notwithstanding their best efforts, the parties are unable to reach agreement," Trump's attorneys and lawyers for the U.S. House tell a Washington federal trial judge.
July 30, 2019 at 06:55 PM
6 minute read
President Donald Trump's personal attorney and U.S. House lawyers said Tuesday they were unable to reach an agreement over how to proceed in the president's bid to prevent federal lawmakers from seeking copies of his New York state tax returns.
The impasse threw further uncertainty into Trump's push to bar House Democrats from seizing on a New York law, passed only weeks ago, that opened a path for lawmakers to request the tax returns from state finance officials. Trump, defying norms, has refused to release his state and federal tax returns, despite promises that he would do so.
The two sides, along with the New York state attorney general's office, were directed to the negotiation table by U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols of the District of Columbia, a Trump court appointee who joined the bench just a few weeks ago.
At a court hearing Monday, Nichols said the case presented him with a procedural “conundrum,” as the Democrat-controlled House Ways and Means Committee has not yet made any request for Trump's New York tax returns. But Nichols also noted that New York officials could provide Trump's tax returns to House Democrats without notifying the president, rendering the case moot before it could be fully heard.
Nichols ordered the two sides to try to negotiate a process that would preserve the president's ability to challenge any production of his state tax returns to House Democrats. About a half hour before their 6 p.m. deadline, the lawyers said they could not reach such a compromise.
House general counsel Douglas Letter, in a joint court filing with Trump's lawyer and the New York state attorney general's office, stressed that Congress enjoys broad legislative immunity that should shield it from the president's push for an injunction. Any such order issued against the committee, Letter argued, would mark the first time—”as far as counsel for the House is aware”—that a court has overridden that immunity and stopped a body of Congress from taking legislative steps.
“This is of particular concern where the injunction against a body of Congress would be issued at the behest of the President, raising glaring separation of powers concerns; this is precisely what the Framers of the Constitution wished to guard against,” Letter said.
Trump's lawyer, William Consovoy of the Washington firm Consovoy McCarthy, proposed that the House Ways and Means Committee be required to provide 14 days' notice of any request for the president's state tax returns. Consovoy also offered an alternative: New York should notify Nichols of any request it receives from the House and wait 14 days before providing Trump's tax returns.
Andrew Amer, a special litigation counsel for the New York attorney general's office, argued that the state's offices fell outside Nichols's jurisdiction as a trial judge in Washington. Trump's claims against New York, he argued, should be dismissed or at the very least be transferred to Manhattan federal district court.
Still, if Nichols set an expedited schedule for hearing arguments on the jurisdiction question, Amer said the commissioner of the New York finance department would temporarily hold off on responding to any request for Trump's state tax returns.
That respite would end a week after Nichols's ruling on the jurisdiction issue, Amer said, giving Trump a “reasonable opportunity to take whatever steps he deems necessary to protect his interests” if the judge rules for New York. If Nichols rules against New York, Amer said, the state's proposal would give the parties time to meet and consider next steps.
Trump's lawsuit takes aim at the Trust Act, a New York law enacted earlier this month that allows state finance officials to turn the president's tax returns over to Congress. The law, according to the president's lawyers, was “enacted it to discriminate and retaliate against President Trump for his speech and politics,” in violation of his First Amendment rights. Consovoy has argued that House Democrats lack a valid legislative purpose for seeking the president's tax returns.
A co-sponsor of the New York bill said the measure was one step to give the U.S. Congress another oversight tool as a co-equal federal branch of government. “This is an important juncture in our history where we have a White House stonewalling Congress and preventing it from undertaking its oversight responsibility,” State Sen. Brad Hoylman, a Manhattan Democrat, said in May.
The case is one of several in Washington and New York courts that confront the secrecy of Trump's financial records.
Two federal appeals courts are weighing trial judges' orders that said congressional committees are permitted to obtain records from Trump's longtime lender Deutsche Bank and his accounting firm Mazars USA. Separately, the House has sued the Trump administration to obtain six years' worth of the president's federal tax returns.
A lawyer for Trump on Tuesday threatened to sue California over a new state law, signed by the governor, that requires presidential candidates to submit their tax returns in order to appear on the ballot.
Trump has maintained that he is being audited but otherwise would release his tax returns. “I don't mind releasing. I'm under a routine audit, and it will be released. As soon as the audit's finished, it will be released,” Trump said shortly before the 2016 election.
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 AllDemocrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal with GOP
'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
4 minute readHolland & Knight, Akin, Crowell, Barnes and Day Pitney Add to DC Practices
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
- 2European, US Litigation Funding Experts Look for Commonalities at NYU Event
- 3UPS Agrees to $45M Settlement With SEC Over Valuation Claim
- 4For Midsize Law Firms, Curbing Boys-Club Culture Starts with Diversity at the Top
- 5Southern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
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