The Supreme Court will render its decision shortly regarding Trump's financials today. The decision is going to establish precedents to determine how much immunity future presidents will have from congressional investigations. A far reaching ruling on oversight vs abuse of power by Congress. The Meuller investigation reenforced the precedent that only Congress can charge the president with a crime thru the impeachment process. If the Court now limits the investigative powers of Congress to find such evidence, its easy to see future presidents ignoring all subpoenas. On the other hand, Trump is argueing that Congress should not be allowed to abuse those powers to search for evidence which are motivated for political reasons. Is it possible that any congressional investigation of a president be void of political motivations? The possibility of never ending investigations by an overzealous Congress is also a consideration.
If subpoenas in financial investigations can be ignored because they are deemed to be political in nature, what about other subpoenas? Is "any" subpoena of a president not at least partially motivated by partisan politics? What guideline could the court set to determine the level of political motivation. How much immunity should a president receive vs how much oversight Congress should have? This will have lasting consequences.
Can the Court maintain a semblance of neutrality in a ruling which could have a big effect on this election and even more so on the next 4 years of a Trump presidency?. Whether Trump is gone in 4 months or 4 years, this is going to have lasting effects on executive power and checks and balances. We have seen the powers of the presidency expanded in recent years with the use of executive orders by both Obama and Trump. Whether the court allows the subpoenas,to stand or not, will it try and establish some guidelines as to this very important question regarding checks and balances? Not just with regard to this subpoena, but all subpoenas.
My personal guess is they pass the buck on this particular subpoena with regard to the congressional request but grant the state of New York's request.
It will be interesting to see their decision.
If subpoenas in financial investigations can be ignored because they are deemed to be political in nature, what about other subpoenas? Is "any" subpoena of a president not at least partially motivated by partisan politics? What guideline could the court set to determine the level of political motivation. How much immunity should a president receive vs how much oversight Congress should have? This will have lasting consequences.
Can the Court maintain a semblance of neutrality in a ruling which could have a big effect on this election and even more so on the next 4 years of a Trump presidency?. Whether Trump is gone in 4 months or 4 years, this is going to have lasting effects on executive power and checks and balances. We have seen the powers of the presidency expanded in recent years with the use of executive orders by both Obama and Trump. Whether the court allows the subpoenas,to stand or not, will it try and establish some guidelines as to this very important question regarding checks and balances? Not just with regard to this subpoena, but all subpoenas.
My personal guess is they pass the buck on this particular subpoena with regard to the congressional request but grant the state of New York's request.
It will be interesting to see their decision.
