A US federal judge has rejected President Donald Trump 's claim to be immune from all criminal investigations and dismissed his lawsuit challenging a state grand jury subpoena for tax returns sought by Manhattan's district attorney.
US District Judge Victor Marrero said in his ruling that he could not grant such a "categorical and limitless assertion of presidential immunity".
Trump's lawyers immediately appealed to the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals, also based in Manhattan, meaning the eight years of tax returns are unlikely to be turned over immediately.
Manhattan district attorney Cyrus R Vance Jr, a Democrat, asked Trump's accounting firm to turn over his business and personal tax returns as part of an investigation of the Trump Organisation's alleged involvement in buying the silence of two women who claimed to have had affairs with the president.
Trump's lawyers have said the investigation is politically motivated and the request for his tax records should be stopped because he is immune from any criminal probe as long as he is president.
In striking down Trump's attempt to block the subpoena, Judge Marrero called Trump's claim of a broad immunity "extraordinary" and "an overreach of executive power".
"As the court reads it, presidential immunity would stretch to cover every phase of criminal proceedings, including investigations, grand jury proceedings and subpoenas, indictment, prosecution, arrest, trial, conviction, and incarceration," Judge Marrero wrote.
"That constitutional protection presumably would encompass any conduct, at any time, in any forum, whether federal or state, and whether the president acted alone or in concert with other individuals."
The judge said he could not accept that legal view, "especially in the light of the fundamental concerns over excessive arrogation of power that animated the constitution's delicate structure and its calibrated balance of authority among the three branches of the national government, as well as between the federal and state authorities".
Justice Department lawyers in Washington, who had urged Judge Marrero to delay deciding the issue, declined to comment.
Vance began his probe after federal prosecutors in Manhattan completed their investigation into payments that Trump's former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, arranged to be paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels and model Karen McDougal to keep them silent during the presidential race.
The Trump Organisation later reimbursed Cohen.
Cohen is serving a three-year prison sentence for crimes that included campaign finance violations.
Trump was never charged, though prosecutors said publicly that he was aware of and directed the illegal payments.
Justice Department policy has long been that sitting presidents cannot be charged criminally.
Grand jury proceedings and records in New York are secret.
If Vance gains access to Trump's returns through a grand jury investigation, that does not mean that their contents would be disclosed publicly.
It is unclear what Trump's returns might have to do with the criminal investigation.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel