A federal judge on Monday rejected President Donald Trumps attempt to stop Manhattan, New York’s district attorney from obtaining his tax returns.

The decision from Judge Victor Marrero — who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton — comes roughly a month after Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. issued a subpoena to Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, for eight years of his personal and corporate tax returns. Trump’s attorneys stated on Monday they would appeal the new ruling concerning the president’s taxes dating back to 2011, a move that suggests more delays are probable.

Marrero sharply rebuked Trump in his 75-page ruling, calling his argument for trying to block Vance’s subpoena “repugnant to the nation’s governmental structure and constitutional values.”

Vance’s office has been probing Trump and Mazars’ reimbursement of the president’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen for $130,000 in hush money payments he made to porn star Stormy Daniels during the weeks leading up to the 2016 election. Daniels claimed she had an affair with Trump in 2006. When Trump’s legal team filed a lawsuit last month to block the subpoena, the group of attorneys argued that the Constitution states that sitting presidents cannot be the subjects of criminal investigations until they leave office. Trump’s attorneys have also repeatedly slammed Vance’s inquiry politically motivated, as the Manhattan district attorney is a Democrat. The president himself also reiterated this sentiment in a tweet Monday morning:

Vance’s office requested that Marrero throw out Trump’s lawsuit, citing a grand jury’s right to “pursue its investigation free from interference and litigious delay.” The district attorney also rejected the president’s claim of total immunity.

The Justice Department also became involved in the case surrounding Trump’s taxes last week. The agency asked Judge Marrero to temporarily block the subpoena while the court evaluates the constitutional problems the case presents.

There is no clause in the Constitution that clearly states whether sitting presidents can be indicted. The Supreme Court has yet to respond to this question.

Trump’s lawyers have also filed suits against New York Democratic state lawmakers for their efforts to obtain the president’s tax returns and business records.


Read more about:

Get the free uPolitics mobile app for the latest political news and videos

iPhone Android

Leave a comment