CNBC reports.
So it's on to the Supreme Court. I'll take a look at the dissenting judge's opinion.
UPDATE: Well, that was confusing. CNBC has now corrected its article (with a notation that it's "updated" but without specifying the error). It now reads:
The 2-1 ruling by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a federal district judge’s decision denying Trump’s effort to stop the committee from getting eight years’ worth of his financial records from the accounting firm Mazars USA.... The appeals panel ordered that the effect of the ruling be put on hold until seven days after the disposition of a petition for a rehearing of the case by either the same panel or by the entire D.C. Circuit judges....No wonder I couldn't find the opinion at the 2d Circuit webpage. So annoying! But there is also a 2d Circuit case:
Trump currently is asking the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in Manhattan to block another subpoena, for his corporate and personal income tax returns, which was issued by a state grand jury in New York City. That other subpoena was sought by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office as part of a separate criminal investigation.... The 2nd Circuit is set to hear Trump’s appeal of that decision later this month....ADDED: Here's the 134-page opinion in the D.C. Circuit case. And here's a picture of the first page of the dissenting opinion, which makes the argument quite clear, I think. Click to enlarge and clarify:
Posts
67 comments:
So, it’s a lie that tax returns are confidential. Good to know.
Show me the man, I will find his crime didn't die with Beria
So, every elected, and appointed individual, judges, etc., in a position of authority, is now required to submit their tax returns.
What the hell is the pretense for this at all (beyond OrangeManBad)? Can someone point me to the law or legal precedent that they're ostensibly making use of for this? Are they trying to say that the IRS isn't doing it's job?
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes. even more, I would like to know if he has any previously undisclosed potential conflicts of interest. But that's just me.
oh I forgot, He is president so therefore he can't have conflicts of interest. ...
I think this means I have a 4th Amendment right not to file tax returns now.
So they can no longer require anybody to report income, owing to requiring self-incrimination
Should I have the Florida butterflies?
Darn morderation.
So it's on to the Supreme Court.
That reminds me of something I saw somewheres...
● Who gets to say if an answer is right?
● What is the process for verifying the truth?
● Who is Smart? Who is not Smart?
I want Pelosi and Schumer tax returns for the past 20 yr to see how they have enriched themselves. And also each member of the Second Circus. Long term, this will not end well.
Q3 earnings are starting to trickle out, some sectors looking stronger than expected. ‘Surprisingly’.
Funny, I thought you needed probable cause before your tax returns could be subpoenaed. What crime is he accused of?
How fast can the Supreme Court turn this around??
Chief Justice Roberts will declare Trump's returns to be fines, and not taxes. Therefore, the lower court decision stands.
Be careful what you wish for...open up EVERY Congress critters tax returns so we can see how they became millionaires off the backs of taxpayers!
But the dissent cites nothing in the Constitution or case law—and there is nothing—that compels Congress to abandon its legislative role at the first scent of potential illegality and confine itself exclusively to the impeachment process
Isn't that backwards? The U.S. Constitution doesn't enumerate every power Congress doesn't have, it only enumerates those Congress has. Is it not on the majority in this case to cite Congress' authority to subpoena the President for legislative purposes?
So a Clinton judge and an Obama judge outvote a Trump judge on a fundamental violation of perhaps the most private of a citizen's information. Sure glad I have been instructed that the judicial system is not political at all.
Typo second Circuit should be DC Circuit.
Remember, if there was anything criminal (or even anything politically damaging) in those returns, they would have already been leaked by now. I tend to think that this issue is just Trump waving a laser pointer at a bunch of kittens.
From the ruling...
According to the Committee, the documents will inform its investigation into whether Congress should amend or supplement current ethics-in-government laws.
From the dissent...
This is the first time a court has recognized that a congressional investigation pertains to “whether and how illegal conduct has occurred,” Maj. Op. 30, but then upholds that investigation under the legislative power. The majority attempts to rely on our precedents to justify this subpoena by focusing on whether it is an impermissible exercise of “law enforcement” power. Id. at 21–22 (responding to appellants). The majority relies on cases that deal with private citizens and problems of administration—but a subpoena against the President that investigates allegations of illegal conduct cannot be shoehorned into this framework.
My guess is the Trump uses the loopholes in place to depreciate stuff and pay less in taxes.
Just like anyone else.
*Warren Buffet*+
but when Trump does it - it looks bad.
What a joke. 63 Million Americans voted for Trump and these asshole Democrats seek to nullify those votes with never-ending investigations into his tax returns.
An idiot can hire a team of accountants to scrutinize a tax return and find a few nits. That's by design! Make it complicated, make us all lawbreakers, selectively nail you "opponent" lawbreakers.
The "Get Trump" Squad has irked me this morning. But it will soon pass.
Ray has ambitions for promotion.
People got so much shit about questioning Obama's place of birth, but there have been a daily barrage of unfounded claims and expectations against Trump for three years now, with no proof found for any of it. Who is really unhinged by comparison? Where is the ridicule for all these conspiracy theories?
So what was the basis for requiring AL Capone to open his income tax vault?
does IRS street cred stands or falls with this?!
The State of New York's argument for Tax Returns is based on the false assumption that paying for a NDA settlement with porn stars is a candidate's self campaign contribution requiring disclosure on reports. The BS of propaganda from a lie is all they got. And after Nov. 2,2020 the 10 years of Tax Returns lose all their value to the Slanderama CIA Media.
In the interest of justice, judges should give their tax returns to all litigants appearing before them.
The average Joe will be manipulated 24/7 with whatever is in Trump's taxes, even the most legally defensible things, because average Joe does not understand being rich, even though he would take advantage of all the same tax laws if he could. It's only fair if compared to rich lefties, and that will only be done by FOX News, as nobody else will provide that context. In the end though, as with Romney, the lies will run wild while the fact will be ignored that Trump actually pays the fair share of taxes for thousands of Americans who don't. Yea, I'm looking at you, average Joe. He pays your taxes and those of many like you.
I will surprised if the Supreme Court takes this case. rao does not have precedent for her position. Seems to be a job application.
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
Did you want to know whether Barack Obama was a natural-born citizen in accordance with the US Constitution?
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
Has the IRS indicated that he cheats on his taxes?
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes
I would like to know if steve uhr cheats on his taxes.
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
I would like to know if Hunter Biden cheats on his taxes.
I'd still like to see Obamas ORIGINAL birth-certificate and high-school / college transcripts...
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
And, if he does, you won't vote for him again?
btw that was trevor potter's novel legal theory, that an nda was inkind contribution, the one who set up the outfit that nabbed the two bothan spies,
Steve Uhr and pals were the same ones who lied about Mitt Romney not paying taxes for 10 years.
So, you know, just another day in lefty fascist land.
"I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes."
You would like to know if he does, but I bet you would prefer not to know if he doesn't.
Even if he does not, the left will make their case that he did. Isn't that exactly what they have done every day since he was elected; make a false claim, beat it to death, and then move to the next one when the truth comes out.
Bob said...
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
And, if he does, you won't vote for him again?
At least steve admitted Trump is his president.
readering said...
I will surprised if the Supreme Court takes this case.
readering is often surprised. What do you expect to find in Trump's taxes?
To Uhr is human, to care about other people's taxes, divine.
It does set a dnagerous precedent to allow politically motivated Congresses and courts to troll for political fodder this way. One good thing comes from it- on more data point demoonstrating just how dumb Democrats are about basic rules of taxation and economics.
No Liz, GE does actually pay taxes hon...
As leaky as DC is now days, I'm pretty sure some Dems already know what's in his taxes. Probably nothing much, but they can get millage on the lie that there is, just like Russian collusion narrative. Remember, Shift has tons of evidence, proof I tell ya, that Trump colluded. Two years of that bullshit, and then poof, like he never said it.
Isn’t steve uhr a lawyer? Was he in the habit of ignoring the 5th amendment?
What do you expect to find in Trump's taxes?
A 1099 from Putin...
Who's votes is this supposed to 'garner'?
Nobody who actually works, or has any interaction with the IRS.
What do you expect to find in Trump's taxes?
Political leverage, not through Trump, but associates with weaker constitutions, and less resources.
I'd still like to see Obamas ORIGINAL birth-certificate and high-school / college transcripts...
That wouldn't be politically congruent. McCain, yes. Bush, yes. Obama, no, we can't.
The dissent would vindicate those Democrats who have thought it would put the House on better legal footing against the President to open an impeachment inquiry.
steve uhr at 9:48 AM
I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes.
Isn't that the job of the IRS?
Be honest Steve. You guys just want to dig into every aspect of his life to embarrass him.
Let's dig into your life, Steve. Anything you don't want us to know?
it does nothing of the kind, it shows how sloppy the whole procedure was,
An admirably clear statement in the dissent indeed.
Isn’t legislating against a person attainder? Saying “we can have Bob's tax returns under our legislative power” sounds like legislation against Bob.
Ken B: "Isn’t legislating against a person attainder? Saying “we can have Bob's tax returns under our legislative power” sounds like legislation against Bob."
It most certainly is. As was the ludicrous CA bill requiring the release of taxes in order for a candidate to be placed on the CA ballot for Federal office.
Which is why it was summarily and unceremonially tossed.
Steve Uhr hardest hit.
Hon. David S. Tatel, appointed by Clinton in 1994.
Hon. Patricia Ann Millett, appointed by Obama in 2013.
Hon. Neomi Rao, appointed by Trump in 2019.
I've read somewhere that the 2nd Circuit will shift control to Republican appointed judges after the next 2 judges are confirmed. I've also read that the D.C. Circuit just shifted to Republican control.
(Also, I searched the 2nd Circuit website this morning and couldn't find the case.)
I would like to know the valid legislative purpose behind this subpoena.
I would like to know the vote of the full chamber that authorized the committee's investigation.
I would REALLY like to know why none of the fucking lawyers around here seem to understand that those are requirements set out by SCOTUS to determine whether a congressional subpoena is legally sufficient.
“Isn’t legislating against a person attainder?”
They are, I think, arguing that they’re collecting background that will be used to come up with generally applicable legislation. It’s just not believable.
A 134-page opinion so soon in the case indicates a lot of cutting and pasting from one party's briefs.
"I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes."
And how do you propose to determine that from his tax returns? If I send you a copy of my tax return, will you know if I cheated?
Not Crazy:
"This legal battle has to be seen to be believed. Attorney Steven Uhr’s lawsuit alleging a huge nationwide antitrust conspiracy to eliminate “Happy Hour” drink specials by the “hospitality industry” under cover of public health efforts of the University of Minnesota and several other large educational institutions gets tossed out of court. U.S. District Court Judge Patrick J. Schiltz (D. Minn.) stopped short of sanctioning Uhr, which two defendants had sought.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwVkb6p7OhGiM2E0NGQ2Y2ItN2UxOC00MmEyLTg0NTItMDc0YjkzMGRhODc1/view
“It’s just not believable.”
It would be if you were a Democrat, which you are not.
They are, I think, arguing that they’re collecting background that will be used to come up with generally applicable legislation. It’s just not believable.
Is believability a requirement? Sounds like the type of thing SCOTUS defers to the legislative.
Rehajm
I think they defer in legislation (which would I think be attainder) but not so much in separation of powers.
Judge Tatel, who wrote the majority opinion, is a very highly regarded judge, who might well have ended up on the Supreme Court if there had been the right Democrat President at the right point in Tatel's career. Before going on the bench, he was a partner in the DC law firm of Hogan & Hartson (now Hogan Lovells). So was John Roberts. So if this case goes to the Supreme Court, it will involve alumni of the same DC law firm. And, of course, they both served on the DC Circuit before Roberts' elevation to the Supreme Court. I know and respect both of them. They are fine jurists and good people. They are both capable of being wrong.
Ah, so Nazi steve is batshit too. He should be investigated with an eye to disbarring.
"I would like to know if our president cheats on his taxes. even more, I would like to know if he has any previously undisclosed potential conflicts of interest."
-- That's great. But you don't get to use the force of the state to rip apart people's Constitutional right to freedom of association and privacy.
If we can request people's tax returns to see if they committed a crime, I want the tax returns of every journalist and media corporation to see if they were receiving or sending money to or from interests associated with the people they were covering. Everyone plays by the same rules.
Congress has no legislative purpose in this and the Constitution prohibits bills of attainder. Simple.
Post a Comment