Trump v. Mazars, USA, LLP

Interbranch conflicts between the President and Congress calls for a level of scrutiny higher than what is required for an ordinary subpoena, but lower than what is required to overcome executive privilege.

Congressional committees issued several subpoenas on third parties for "financial records" of President Trump, Trump family members, and their associated businesses. The President challenged these subpoenas in two District Courts, which upheld the subpoenas as enforceable. The President appealed the cases respectively to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and Second Circuit Court of Appeals; both of which affirmed. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the President argued that the subpoenas contravene the separation of powers. The House argued that the subpoenas were within its implied powers because they had a “valid legislative purpose.” A Congressional subpoena is generally enforceable if it furthers a “valid legislative purpose.” Quinn v. United States, 349 U.S. 155, 161 (1955). But cf. United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974). The Court held that the “interbranch conflict here” called for a level of scrutiny higher than what is required for an ordinary subpoena, but lower than what is required to overcome executive privilege. The Court found that that the matter required a balancing of the public interest. The appropriate factors include (1) whether intrusion on the President is needed, (2) how limited the scope of the subpoena is to that need, (3) how strongly the evidence shows a need, and (4) how burdensome the subpoena is on the President. VACATED and REMANDED.