House Democrats Urge SCOTUS to Deny Stay of Deutsche Bank Subpoenas on Trump Records
"Legislative efforts to secure the financial system from abuse have obvious importance," House general counsel Douglas Letter said.
December 11, 2019 at 12:39 PM
4 minute read
Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives have urged the U.S. Supreme Court to deny a stay preventing Congress from enforcing subpoenas seeking financial records on President Donald Trump and his business from two banks, or to expedite the case if the justices do issue a stay.
House general counsel Douglas Letter said in Wednesday's filing that subpoenas issued by two Democratic-controlled committees to Deutsche Bank and Capital One are for "legitimate legislative purposes" and should be enforced without further delay.
The subpoenas targeted non-privileged records related to Trump, his businesses and family members and will aid the House's efforts to root out foreign influence in the 2020 presidential elections, Letter wrote.
"Legislative efforts to secure the financial system from abuse have obvious importance. And nothing is more urgent than efforts to guard against foreign influence in our systems for electing officials, particularly given the upcoming 2020 elections," Letter said.
Wednesday's filing comes after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg temporarily stayed a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which ordered "prompt compliance" with the set of subpoenas from the House Financial Services Committee and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Ginsburg's order remains in place until Friday evening.
The Second Circuit's split ruling found a "clear and substantial" public interest in enforcing the subpoenas and directed a lower court to implement procedures to protect some "sensitive personal information" and documents. Unlike other rulings involving Trump's financial records, however, it did not delay the effect of the decision, pending an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Trump attorney William Consovoy, of Consovoy McCarthy, on Dec. 6 filed an emergency petition, saying House lawyers rejected his request to speed up the appeals process in exchange for a stay.
He said the Deutsche Bank litigation closely mirrored a case in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld similar subpoenas of Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA, but blocked their immediate enforcement.
That case has also been petitioned to the Supreme Court, along with a separate challenge from the Second Circuit involving grand jury subpoena issued by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr.
As in the Mazars case, Consovoy argued, the subpoenas of Deutsche Bank and Capital One raised important separation of powers issues, and the banks should not be forced to produce documents until the justices are given a chance to weigh in.
"The issue at this stage is straightforward: whether the president will be allowed to petition for review of an unprecedented demand for his personal papers, or whether he will be deprived of that opportunity because the committees issued these subpoenas to third parties with no incentive to test their validity," Consovoy wrote in the petition. "This choice should be easy."
On Wednesday, Letter distinguished the Deutsche Bank case from the Mazars case, saying that it turned on a separate set of facts. If the high court were to grant a further stay in the case, Letter said the justices should treat the papers already submitted as a petition for cert or condition any stay on the "expeditious filing" of such a request.
Speed and timing could be an issue for the various investigations seeking Trump's financial records, which is why legal scholars have said the president's attorneys have tried to use procedural hurdles to delay litigation. If Democrats were to lose control of the House in the 2020 elections, the chances of Republicans continuing with the vast investigations into Trump, his finances and his administration are slim to none.
Read more:
After Circuit Court Loss, Trump's Lawyers Could Delay a Final Ruling in Dems' Subpoena Case
2nd Circuit Rejects Trump Bid to Block House Subpoenas for Financial Records
Trump's Lawyers Make Their Case at SCOTUS to Keep Financial Records Secret
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 All'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Which Legal Tech Jobs Are on the Rise, and Which Aren't, with Jared Coseglia
- 2Absent Explicit Agreement, Court Rejects Unilateral Responsiveness Redaction of Text Messages
- 3SEC Whistleblower Program: What to Expect Under the Trump Administration
- 4Sidley Hires Paul Hastings Energy Finance Partner in Houston
- 5Potential Pitfalls in Arbitrating Religious Disputes
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