header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 April 2020 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7883 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Trump card: oral hearing postponed

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Michael Zander asks, is President Trump above the law?

The US Supreme Court, for the first time in its history, because of the coronavirus cancelled last month’s oral hearing to hear three cases brought by President Trump. In each case the president is seeking to stop presumably damaging information from being handed over.

Trump v Vance is to block the district attorney of New York City’s subpoena of Trump’s personal financial records including his tax returns for a grand jury investigation into whether several people committed crimes by paying hush money to Stormy Daniels, to stop her from talking about her sexual relations with Trump in 2006. Trump v Mazars and Trump v Deutsche Bank are to block respectively his accountancy firm and the bank from handing congressional committees similar records in connection with hearings as to whether the President misstated his assets to avoid tax liabilities or violated financial disclosure obligations. All the matters being investigated occurred before Trump became President.

The issues raised are laid out in

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll