President Donald Trump's lawyers on Thursday took the next step in their fight to keep his financial records secret, formally asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a U.S. House subpoena that a lower court in Washington found to be a lawful exercise of congressional oversight.

In Trump's petition, his counsel William Consovoy, partner in Consovoy McCarthy, asked the justices to decide whether the House Committee has the constitutional and statutory authority to issue the subpoena.

"At its core, this controversy is about whether—and to what degree—Congress can exercise dominion and control over the Office of the President," Consovoy wrote. "It is unsurprising, then, that the one thing the district court, the panel, and the dissenting judges all agreed upon is this case raises important separation-of-powers issues. These are profoundly serious constitutional questions that the court should decide."

The Supreme Court on Nov. 25, without dissent, temporarily blocked enforcement of a subpoena issued by the House Oversight and Reform Committee to Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA. A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit had upheld the subpoena in October.

The justices had set a noon Thursday deadline for Trump's lawyers to file a petition challenging the merits of the appellate court's decision, a timeline that would let the court—if it chooses—hear the dispute this term.

The short deadline for the filing of the petition indicates the high court will move quickly to decide whether it will hear arguments in the dispute. The justices now are likely to set an equally short deadline for House lawyers to respond to the petition. Consovoy told the justices that Trump is "prepared to proceed on any schedule the court deems appropriate" if the justices grant review.

The case is one of many in Washington and New York courts that challenge Trump over the secrecy of his financial records.

As a presidential candidate, Trump had vowed to release his tax returns, as modern presidents have done as a matter of routine. The House has sued the IRS and Treasury to obtain his tax returns, which Democrats contend are necessary to review for oversight purposes as they explore Trump's vast business network and any alleged abuses by Trump to profit from the presidency.

House general counsel Douglas Letter had opposed the temporary stay of the Mazars subpoena. He argued that two levels of the federal judiciary had upheld that subpoena as valid and enforceable under Supreme Court precedents.

Doug Letter Douglas Letter, general counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives. (Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)

"Each concluded that the committee issued the subpoena in furtherance of a valid legislative purpose and that the subpoena seeks documents relevant to a subject about which Congress could enact legislation," Letter wrote in his response. Letter is assisted by lawyers from the Washington firm Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber.

Mazars' lawyers at Blank Rome have not taken sides in the dispute.

Testimony by Trump former attorney Michael Cohen during the House committee's hearing in February triggered the subpoena to Mazars. Cohen alleged that Trump had inflated and deflated his assets on personal financial statements to obtain a bank loan and to reduce his New York real estate taxes and insurance premiums.

The high court has a second petition pending that also involves Trump's financial records.  Trump's personal lawyer, Jay Alan Sekulow, along with Consovoy, is challenging a state grand jury subpoena issued by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. to Mazars and upheld by the Second Circuit.

The grand jury is examining allegations that the president paid hush money to two women through his former lawyer Cohen prior to the 2016 election. The appellate court rejected Trump's argument that he enjoyed absolute immunity.