The US president is not inviolable, but President Trump does not have to give the New York Public Prosecutor access to his financial data for the time being. That is the result of a ruling by the United States Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court, by a majority of 7 to 2, ordered that he should hand over his financial data to the judiciary, but that he can still defend himself before the district court. The case has therefore been referred back to a lower court.
Prosecutor Cyrus Vance requires access to Trump’s tax records and accounts to determine whether he has committed any criminal offenses and, for example, has taken money from foreign powers for his election campaign.
The court ruled that Trump should not block the transfer of the data, because a sitting president in criminal matters is not entirely inviolable.
This part of the ruling is seen as a defeat for Trump, whose lawyers argued that a sitting president is entirely inviolable. Vance speaks of a “huge victory” because it has been found that “not even a president is above the law.”
Possibly after the elections.
But in fact, the court has referred the case back to a lower court, says correspondent Marieke de Vries. A district court must decide whether Trump should hand over his details to the prosecutor. This can take weeks and possibly until after the elections.
In tweets, the president says he thinks it is “unfair” to spend more time as a president on a case before a lower court.
The Supreme Court sends case back to Lower Court, arguments to continue. This is all a political prosecution. I won the Mueller Witch Hunt, and others, and now I have to keep fighting in a politically corrupt New York. Not fair to this Presidency or Administration!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 9, 2020
In another case, Congress asked for access to Trump’s financial records. The Supreme Court says that the request is formulated too broadly. The court also referred to this. A district court must decide what Congress can ask for.
Trump has always opposed access to his financial records. It already played a role in the election campaign. Other candidates always gave insight into their financial trade and conduct.
