TRUMP VS.

MAZARS

FACTS:

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform issued a subpoena to Mazars
USA, the accounting firm for Donald Trump (in his capacity as a private citizen) and several of his
businesses, demanding private financial records belonging to Trump. According to the Committee, the
requested documents would inform its investigation into whether Congress should amend or supplement
its ethics-in-government laws. Trump argued that the information serves no legitimate legislative purpose
and sued to prevent Mazars from complying with the subpoena.

The district court granted summary judgment for the Committee, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
D.C. Circuit affirmed, finding the Committee possesses the authority under both the House Rules and the
Constitution.

In the consolidated case, Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760, two committees of the U.S. House of
Representatives—the Committee on Financial Services and the Intelligence Committee—issued a
subpoena to the creditors of President Trump and several of his businesses. The district court denied
Trump’s motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent compliance with the subpoenas, and the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed in substantial part and remanded in part.

ISSUE:

In aid of legislation, can Congress subpoena for the production of bank and financial records, foreign
transactions, business statements, debt schedules, and tax returns of a sitting President?

RULING:

No, the court ruled that Congress could not, at least for now, see many of the same records. It said the
case should be returned to lower courts to examine whether the Congress should narrow the parameters of
the information it sought.