French accounting firm Mazars Srcl, which has been president Trump's accounting firm since before he became U.S. president in 2017, has been ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to turn over some of his financial records to the Oversight Committee of the House of Representatives.
Two of the three judges in the three-person court brushed aside arguments by Trump's lawyers the Oversight Committee's subpoena of Trump's tax returns is nothing but a fishing expedition.
"Contrary to the President's arguments, the Committee possesses the authority under both the House Rules and the Constitution to issue the subpoena, and Mazars must comply," wrote Judge David Tatel in an opinion seconded by Judge Patricia Millett.
The court said the subpoena was not a mere fishing expedition, as Trump alleges, but an effort to see if there are loopholes in the current financial disclosure laws covering the president that need to be plugged.
Tatel also wrote "nothing in the Constitution or case law ... compels Congress to abandon its legislative role at the first scent of potential illegality and confine itself exclusively to the impeachment process."
"Disputes between Congress and the President are a recurring plot in our national story," the court majority concluded. That is "precisely what the Framers intended." They sought to balance the powers between the three branches of government to "save the people from autocracy."
The majority opinion cited a number of cases involving former President Richard Nixon and his "Nixon Papers" and the conduct of former president Bill Clinton's in making its decision the subpoena is in lawful pursuit of a valid legislative purpose.
The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the Trump financial records after the U.S. Office of Government Ethics determined Trump's financial disclosure report covering 2016 had failed to disclose an embarrassing and possibly illegal payment to porn star Stormy Daniels during the election campaign.
Daniels (real name Stephanie Cliffords) had sex with Trump in 2016 before the presidential election and was paid $130,000 to keep quiet about their affair. Trump's lawyers had the payment reported as a campaign contribution.
It's the second defeat for Trump on the tax returns issue in a week. On Oct. 8, a federal judge in New York City ordered Trump to release his income and corporate tax returns for eight years while dismissing arguments by Trump's lawyers the president enjoys absolute immunity from criminal investigations while in office.
Judge Victor Marrero, Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, also blasted Trump's immunity claim as "repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values."
In his 75-page decision, Marrero also said he can't "square a vision of presidential immunity that would place the President above the law." He said Trump failed to show enforcing the subpoena will interfere with his presidential duties, cause irreparable harm or be against the public interest, as his lawyers allege.
Marrero also rejected as too broad the idea of protecting Trump, his family and his businesses from the criminal process.
"The expansive notion of constitutional immunity invoked here to shield the President from the judicial process would constitute an overreach of executive power," wrote Marrero in his decision.
Marrero said even former president Richard Nixon, who resigned from office rather than be completely impeached, conceded during the Watergate scandal he would be required to produce documents in response to a judicial subpoena.
Trump's tax returns, however, won't be turned over immediately to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan granted Trump's request to temporarily block the order. The appeals court claims the case has "unique issues" justifying a delay.