Appeals Court Rules Against Trump on Subpoenas to Deutsche Bank, Capital One -- 2nd Update

Date : 12/04/2019 @ 1:39AM
Source : Dow Jones News
Stock : Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft (DB)
Quote : 6.54  -0.1 (-1.51%) @ 1:00AM
After Hours
Last Trade
Last $ 6.58 ▲ 0.04 (0.61%)

Appeals Court Rules Against Trump on Subpoenas to Deutsche Bank, Capital One -- 2nd Update

Deutsche Bank Aktiengese... (NYSE:DB)
Historical Stock Chart

6 Months : From Oct 2019 to Apr 2020

Click Here for more Deutsche Bank Aktiengese... Charts.
By Brent Kendall 

A federal appeals court ruled House Democrats can enforce subpoenas to two banks seeking a broad range of President Trump's financial records, as well as those of his family and their businesses.

The ruling marked the third time in recent weeks that appellate judges have upheld subpoenas designed to open a window into Mr. Trump's financial dealings. Unlike his predecessors, the president has declined to release his tax returns, and he retains ownership of private companies that do business with the government. Those decisions have prompted high-stakes legal battles with congressional committees and New York prosecutors.

The mounting legal losses have left Mr. Trump with few options, and the Supreme Court now is likely the only body that stands between the president and several major financial disclosures to investigators.

The New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Tuesday rejected Mr. Trump's request to block subpoenas issued by two House committees earlier this year to Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corp.

The subpoenas seek Trump bank and brokerage account records, records on loans and lines of credit and documents from bank employees that served the president and his family.

Mr. Trump has a longstanding relationship with Deutsche Bank. Since 1998, the bank has led or participated in loans of at least $2.5 billion to companies affiliated with Mr. Trump, The Wall Street Journal has reported.

The Intelligence Committee is investigating efforts by foreign entities to influence the U.S. political process, including whether foreign actors have financial leverage over the Trump family and its businesses. The Financial Services Committee is investigating bank-lending practices, including for Mr. Trump and entities tied to him.

The Second Circuit, in a divided ruling, said the committees had valid and lawful purposes for seeking documents, even though the information was about the Trump family's private financial and business affairs.

"The public interest in vindicating the committee's constitutional authority is clear and substantial," Judge Jon Newman wrote for the majority in a 106-page opinion that was joined by Judge Peter Hall.

The court did order some limited exceptions to the subpoenas in order to prevent disclosure of sensitive personal information about the Trump family.

The appeals court agreed to stay its ruling for a week in order to give Mr. Trump the opportunity to seek emergency intervention from the Supreme Court.

"We are evaluating our next options including seeking review at the Supreme Court," said Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow, reiterating the president's position that the subpoenas were invalid.

Mr. Trump's legal team has argued the subpoenas exceed the boundaries of congressional power, seeking purely private information that has no connection to possible legislation.

The committees, operating in the Democratic-controlled House, have argued that Mr. Trump is seeking to impede legitimate investigations into matters of national importance. The ruling "is another in a long line of decisions strongly affirming a broad power of Congress and its committees to obtain information in aid of its legislative authority," Reps. Maxine Waters and Adam Schiff, chairs of the Financial Services and Intelligence Committees, said in a joint statement. Both are California Democrats.

Judge Debra Ann Livingston objected to core parts of the ruling in a 59-page dissent, saying the subpoenas were "deeply troubling" in their breadth and raised separation-of-powers concerns. She would have required the House committees to provide additional support for why the Trump financial records were pertinent to the congressional investigations and should be disclosed.

The case is similar to one that has been litigated in Washington, D.C., in which the House Oversight Committee has sought records from Mr. Trump's longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP. That committee is examining White House ethics issues, including whether the president is improperly profiting from his office.

Lower courts ruled against the president, but the Supreme Court last month suspended that subpoena for now while the president mounts a high court appeal.

Also pending before the high court is a separate Trump appeal that seeks to challenge a subpoena Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. issued to Mazars for Trump financial records -- and tax returns -- as part of a criminal investigation. Mr. Vance is examining hush-money payments to two women who allege they had affairs with Mr. Trump.

The Supreme Court could announce in the next few weeks whether it will review those cases.

--Richard Rubin contributed to this article.

Write to Brent Kendall at brent.kendall@wsj.com

 

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

December 03, 2019 20:24 ET (01:24 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Latest DB Messages

{{bbMessage.M_Alias}} {{bbMessage.MSG_Date}} {{bbMessage.HowLongAgo}} {{bbMessage.MSG_ID}} {{bbMessage.MSG_Subject}}

Loading Messages....


No posts yet, be the first! No {{symbol}} Message Board. Create One! See More Posts on {{symbol}} Message Board See More Message Board Posts


Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.


NYSE, AMEX, and ASX quotes are delayed by at least 20 minutes.
All other quotes are delayed by at least 15 minutes unless otherwise stated.