 Photo Illustration by Sarah Rogers/The Daily Beast/Photos GettyThe federal courts are about to be called upon to adjudicate the most serious conflict between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government since the Watergate era, as President Trump seeks to nullify Congress' constitutionally grounded right to investigate potential presidential misconduct.
The first court decision in this looming battle between the president and Congress was issued on Monday, when Judge Amit Mehta rejected a Trump effort to quash the House Oversight Committee's subpoena for Trump financial records held by an accounting firm. It was not a close call. Courts have long recognized the broad "legislative" authority of Congress, an authority that readily extends to inquiries and investigations into potential presidential and executive branch misconduct, such as occurred in Watergate, Iran-Contra, Whitewater, and Benghazi. Trump has asserted that the House has "political" motives and wants to "embarrass" the president; but as Judge Mehta explained, that is legally irrelevant even if it is true. This is because longstanding precedents simply prevent the courts from second guessing the motives or facially proper legislative purposes of Congress.
In short, this was an easy decision for Judge Mehta, and yet that, curiously, is why the case could well present a serious test for the higher courts, including the Supreme Court.
Read more at The Daily Beast.
|
Private Label