header-logo header-logo

20 May 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7887 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Stormy waters for the president?

21127
Michael Zander on the oral arguments in the three cases against President Trump

The US Supreme Court heard oral argument on May 12 in the three major constitutional cases brought against President Trump—two by Congressional Committees seeking tax returns and other financial information in connection with legislative inquiries as to whether the president misstated his assets to avoid tax liabilities, the third by the Manhattan District Attorney seeking financial records, also including tax returns, in connection with criminal investigation of illegal hush money paid on the President’s behalf to porn star Stormy Daniels (for background see ‘Trump card: oral hearing postponed’, Michael Zander, NLJ, 03 April 2020, p22).

Judging by the oral hearing, it would be surprising if the Chief Justice achieves a unanimous ruling on all three cases.

Because of coronavirus the hearing was conducted remotely by teleconference accessible to the public. The Justices asked questions in order of seniority with the Chief Justice keeping strict time limits. There were two 90-minute sessions. The Justices and counsel

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll