Supreme Court Watch – How far is a President above the Law?

John Christie • April 15, 2020

President Trump has claimed, “I have an Article II [of the Constitution], where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”

In three cases before the Supreme Court this term — Trump v. Mazars, Trump v. Deutsche Bank, and Trump v. Vance — the justices have the opportunity to decide just how far a president is above the law. The cases were to be argued on March 31 and ordinarily would have been decided by the end of June, but were put off due to the coronavirus situation. The Court announced on April 13 that oral arguments for a limited number of cases (including the Trump tax cases) will be heard by teleconference during the first two full weeks of May. Whether this delayed argument will affect the dates of the results — normally by the end of June — will probably remain unknown until we get to the end of June.   

Three congressional committees, as well as prosecutors in New York, have issued subpoenas to Trump’s accountants and creditors for tax and business records, and Trump has sued to stop the firms from complying. Having lost twice at the district court level and twice at the appeals court level, Trump is seeking the Supreme Court’s review of those decisions. Although he sued as a private citizen, his appeals to the Supreme Court are supported by amicus briefs from the Department of Justice.

Mazars and Deutsche Bank involve congressional subpoenas for financial records concerning Trump, his family, and his businesses. After hearing evidence that Trump may not have complied with financial disclosure requirements, the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed Trump’s accounting firm for financial records to assist its evaluation of financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest laws. The Financial Services Committee subpoenaed records from two of Trump’s creditors to determine whether and how to strengthen federal banking laws. Finally, the Intelligence Committee subpoenaed financial records from Deutsche Bank as it investigated possible foreign entanglements. The committee is examining whether and how to prevent foreign interference in the U.S. political process, and also assessing the adequacy of intelligence resources.

The Court of Appeals concluded that these subpoenas “easily pass” the standards the Supreme Court has used when reviewing congressional subpoenas and were “reasonably framed” to help the committees conduct oversight and propose new legislation.

In Vance, a New York state grand jury issued a subpoena to the president’s accounting firm as part of a state criminal investigation into business transactions involving multiple individuals who may have violated state law. The subpoena sought financial and tax records — including for Trump and entities he owned before he became president — from January 2011 to August 2019.

In the lower courts and before the Supreme Court, the president’s lawyers have argued that he enjoys absolute immunity from all criminal process, an immunity so broad that it not only prevents indictment while serving as president, but prevents a third party (such as his accountants) from complying with a grand jury subpoena. However, in cases involving presidents Nixon and Clinton, the Supreme Court rejected similar arguments that a sitting president was broadly immune from an investigatory process.
 
Instead, the Court endorsed a balancing test that weighs the importance of the judicial process against any negative effect on the president’s ability to perform his constitutional functions. Here, only the president’s accountants must comply with the subpoena; the president is not required to do anything. In the Clinton case, the Court concluded that requiring a president to prepare for a deposition and give sworn testimony did not warrant even a postponement of that proceeding, let alone full immunity.

The Supreme Court has never invalidated a congressional subpoena, and recent Court decisions allowing investigations of presidents Nixon and Clinton while in office stand as strong precedents. Trump is obviously counting on the composition of today’s Supreme Court to save him. How the Court decides these three cases will tell us a lot about what kind of Supreme Court we have today.  


John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

Protest against Trumpcare, 2017
By Jan Plotczyk July 9, 2025
More than 30,000 of our neighbors in Maryland’s first congressional district will lose their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid because of provisions in the GOP’s heartless tax cut and spending bill passed last week.
Farm in Dorchester Co.
By Michael Chameides, Barn Raiser May 21, 2025
Right now, Congress is working on a fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs in order to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations.
By Catlin Nchako, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities May 21, 2025
The House Agriculture Committee recently voted, along party lines, to advance legislation that would cut as much as $300 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program, helping more than 41 million people in the U.S. pay for food. With potential cuts this large, it helps to know who benefits from this program in Maryland, and who would lose this assistance. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities compiled data on SNAP beneficiaries by congressional district, cited below, and produced the Maryland state datasheet , shown below. In Maryland, in 2023-24, 1 in 9 people lived in a household with SNAP benefits. In Maryland’s First Congressional District, in 2023-24: Almost 34,000 households used SNAP benefits. Of those households, 43% had at least one senior (over age 60). 29% of SNAP recipients were people of color. 15% were Black, non-Hispanic, higher than 11.8% nationally. 6% were Hispanic (19.4% nationally). There were 24,700 total veterans (ages 18-64). Of those, 2,200 lived in households that used SNAP benefits (9%). The CBPP SNAP datasheet for Maryland is below. See data from all the states and download factsheets here.
By Jan Plotczyk May 21, 2025
Apparently, some people think that the GOP’s “big beautiful bill” is a foregone conclusion, and that the struggle over the budget and Trump’s agenda is over and done. Not true. On Sunday night, the bill — given the alternate name “Big Bad Bullsh*t Bill” by the Democratic Women’s Caucus — was voted out of the House Budget Committee. The GOP plan is to pass this legislation in the House before Memorial Day. But that’s not the end of it. As Jessica Craven explained in her Chop Wood Carry Water column: “Remember, we have at least six weeks left in this process. The bill has to: Pass the House, Then head to the Senate where it will likely be rewritten almost completely, Then be passed there, Then be brought back to the House for reconciliation, And then, if the House changes that version at all, Go back to the Senate for another vote.” She adds, “Every step of that process is a place for us to kill it.” The bill is over a thousand pages long, and the American people will not get a chance to read it until it has passed the House. But, thanks to 5Calls , we know it includes:
By Jared Schablein, Shore Progress May 13, 2025
Let's talk about our Eastern Shore Delegation, the representatives who are supposed to fight for our nine Shore counties in Annapolis, and what they actually got up to this session.
By Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury May 12, 2025
For the first time in recent memory, Virginia Democrats have candidates running in all 100 House of Delegates districts — a milestone party leaders and grassroots organizers say reflects rising momentum as President Donald Trump’s second term continues to galvanize opposition.
Show More