World Media

Trump appeals ruling that backed subpoenas for bank records

Share
Judge Rejects Trump Effort to Block Deutsche Bank SubpoenaMore

Two banks which have done business with Donald Trump say they aren't taking sides in a fight between the president and House Democrats over access to his records.

Judge Edgardo Ramos sided with Congressional lawyers and ruled that the subpoenas are "in furtherance of a facially legitimate government goal", even though they are "undeniably broad".

The president's attorneys filed the appeal (pdf) with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf Trump, his children-Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump-and several of their companies.

Representatives of the Trump Organization, Deutsche Bank and Capital One didn't immediately respond to requests for comment. But it's a key development in the larger, ongoing subpoena battle between Trump and Congress, because it gives Democrats legal ammunition when they go to court to enforce other outstanding subpoena requests.

And it comes a day after Trump blocked his former White House lawyer, Don McGahn, from testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. Patrick Strawbridge, a lawyer for Trump, said it was "probably a safe bet" that the president would appeal the ruling.

President Donald Trump filed an appeal on May 24 seeking to overturn a federal judge's ruling which upheld two Democrat-issued subpoenas seeking the president's financial records from two banks.

The White House is appealing a lower court's decision to block the president from stopping his accounting firm, Mazars USA, from complying with a congressional subpoena.

A 2017 disclosure form showed that Trump had had at least $130 million (€116 million) of liabilities to Deutsche Bank alone, with the new subpoena seeking more records of accounts, transactions and investments linked to Trump, his immediate family and their various businesses.

As the hearing unfolded, the judge told the lawyers he was not going to block the committee's demand, and then after the hearing quickly issued a one-page order refusing a temporary order against enforcement of the subpoena.

In the lawsuit, Trump's attorneys argued that the subpoenas were politically motivated and unwarranted.

Lawyers for the congressional Democrats responded by saying a ruling in Trump's favor would undermine the constitutional separation of powers and impede congressional probes.

In a memorandum of law supporting their motion for a preliminary injunction, Trump had argued that the subpoenas were overbroad and had no legitimate legislative goal.

Deutsche Bank has always been a principal lender for Trump's real estate business and a 2017 disclosure form showed that Trump had at least $US130 million of liabilities to the bank.

Blitzer then asked Scannell "how quickly do you think they'll be released?", referring to Trump's financial documents.

The House Oversight Committee is agreeing to hold off on its request while the case remains under review.

Share