WASHINGTON — President Trump’s accounting firm must turn over his financial records to Congress, a Federal District Court judge ruled on Monday, rejecting his legal team’s argument that lawmakers had no legitimate power to subpoena the files.

But Mr. Trump vowed that his legal team would appeal rather than permit the firm, Mazars USA, to comply with the subpoena and the ruling, so the legal fight is far from over.

The ruling by the judge, Amit P. Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, was an early judicial test of the president’s vow to systematically stonewall “all” subpoenas by House Democrats, stymieing their ability to perform oversight of Mr. Trump and the executive branch after winning control of the chamber in last year’s midterm elections.

[Read the ruling.]

Mr. Trump’s legal team, led by William S. Consovoy, had argued that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform had no legitimate legislative purpose in seeking Mr. Trump’s financial records and was just trying to dig up dirt — like finding out whether the president broke any laws — for political reasons, so the subpoena exceeded its constitutional authority. </s> Washington, May 20 (EFE).- A US federal judge on Monday ruled in favor of a request by the House Oversight Committee to secure financial records of President Donald Trump, who had filed suit to block the move.



Judge Amit Mehta in the District of Columbia ruled that Trump cannot block the request the congressional committee submitted to Mazars USA, the accounting firm used for a decade by the president and his assorted companies.



Trump’s attorneys asserted in their suit that the request by committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, a Democratic, was “unconstitutional.”



Trump and the Trump Organization filed suit against the Cummings in April seeking to block his subpoena request for the president’s financial records, and Mehta on Monday also denied their request for a stay pending appeal.



The president and his lawyers have said that Democrats’ attempts to obtain Trump’s financial information is “all-out political war” in which “subpoenas are their weapon of choice.”



Upon learning of their plan to go after his financial records from his former accounting firm, Trump said in March that House Democrats were “obsessed” with finding something they can use to damage him politically rather than working in a bipartisan manner to pass legislation to benefit Americans.



Mehta, however, said in his ruling that “It is not for the court to question whether the Committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations. Accordingly, the court will enter judgment in favor of the Oversight Committee.”



“It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behavior would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct – past or present – even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry,” Mehta wrote.



In remarks to reporters at the White House, Trump called the judge’s ruling “ridiculous” and said that he would appeal.



On March 20, the Oversight Committee requested that Mazars USA provide financial records and audits prepared for Trump and some of his companies, including the Trump International Hotel located in downtown Washington.



The committee also requested backup documents used to prepare reports and communications between the president and the firm.



The Washington Post reported that Mazars and an earlier firm had provided accounting services to Trump for more than a decade, creating records that the mogul used to get loans, records that contained “exaggerations” but which the company accompanied with a statement saying that the firm was not responsible for inaccuracies in the information.



“Mazars USA will respect the legal process and fully comply with its legal obligations,” Mazars USA told ABC News on Monday.

 On April 8, it became known that Democrats in New York could obtain Trump’s tax records and returns via legislation sponsored by Sen. Brad Hoylman.



The bill, however, would only involve tax records related to New York state, where Trump has his private residence and where his real estate firm and other companies are based, and it would authorize the state to provide such information if requested by Congress. </s> (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Monday ruled in favour of a U.S. House of Representatives committee seeking President Donald Trump’s financial records from his accounting firm, dealing an early setback to the Trump administration in its legal battle with Congress.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington also denied a request by Trump to stay his decision pending an appeal.

Last Tuesday Mehta heard oral arguments on whether Mazars LLP must comply with a House of Representatives Oversight Committee subpoena.

Mehta said in Monday’s ruling that the committee “has shown that it is not engaged in a pure fishing expedition for the President’s financial records” and that the Mazars documents might assist Congress in passing laws and performing other core functions.

“It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behaviour would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct - past or present - even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry,” Mehta said.

Mehta said Mazars has seven days to comply with the subpoena.

It was the first time a federal court had waded into the tussle about how far Congress can go in probing Trump and his business affairs.

Trump told reporters the decision was “crazy” and that it would be appealed.

“It’s totally the wrong decision by obviously an Obama-appointed judge,” Trump said.

Trump is refusing to cooperate with a series of investigations on issues ranging from his tax returns and policy decisions to his Washington hotel and his children’s security clearances.

The standoff deepened on Monday when Trump told former White House counsel Don McGahn to defy a subpoena to testify about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation before a different congressional committee.

Trump’s lawyers have argued that Congress is on a quest to “turn up something that Democrats can use as a political tool against the president now and in the 2020 election.”

The House Oversight Committee claims sweeping investigative power and says it needs Trump’s financial records to examine whether he has conflicts of interest or broke the law by not disentangling himself from his business holdings, as previous presidents did.

Lawyers for Trump and the Trump Organization, his company, last month filed a lawsuit to block the committee’s subpoena, saying it exceeded Congress’ constitutional limits.

Mehta was appointed in 2014 by Democratic former President Barack Obama, who was often investigated by Republicans in Congress during his two terms in office.

Mazars has avoided taking sides in the dispute and said it will “comply with all legal obligations.”

The ruling was “a resounding victory for the rule of law,” Elijah Cummings, the House Oversight Committee chairman, said in a statement.

“Congress must have access to the information we need to do our job effectively and efficiently, and we urge the President to stop engaging in this unprecedented cover-up and start complying with the law,” Cummings said.

A judge in Manhattan will hear arguments on May 22 in a similar lawsuit Trump filed to block subpoenas issued to Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corp.

Mehta’s ruling “will probably have considerable weight in similar factual contexts where the House is seeking other records,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond. </s> Trump Files Notice of Appeal to Ruling on His Financial Records

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump and his businesses filed a notice Tuesday indicating they will appeal a ruling by a federal judge, who said U.S. lawmakers have the power to demand records from his accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that the House Oversight and Reform Committee has authority to examine Trump’s personal and business records going back to 2011. The judge rejected Trump’s claim that Congress wasn’t entitled to the documents because they weren’t sought for a legitimate legislative purpose.

Read More: Democrats Closer to Seeing Trump Finance Records With Ruling

The Mazars case is Trump v. Committee on Oversight and Reform, 19-cv-1136, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

To contact the reporter on this story: Steve Stroth in Chicago at sstroth@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Steve Stroth at sstroth@bloomberg.net

For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com </s> WASHINGTON, DC, USA (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled yesterday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.

US District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.

The committee's reasons were “valid legislative purposes”, Mehta said, and it was not for him “to question whether the committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations.”

The decision comes amid a widespread effort by the White House and the president's lawyers to refuse to cooperate with congressional requests for information and records.

In the case before Mehta, Trump and his business organisation sued to block the subpoena issued in April to Mazars USA, an accountant for the president and Trump Organisation. Trump's lawyers accused Democrats of harassing Trump and said the subpoena “has no legitimate legislative purpose”.

Trump's lawyers, in suing in both Washington and New York in attempt to beat back congressional subpoenas, said congressional investigations are legitimate only if there is legislation that might result from them.

In the New York case, Trump, his business and family have sued Deutsche Bank and Capital One to prevent the financial companies from complying with subpoenas from the House Financial Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee for banking and financial records. A Wednesday hearing is planned in that case.

Even before the ruling, scholars had said Trump's legal argument had little merit and that Congress has broad powers to investigate. </s> A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.

The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."

The decision comes amid a widespread effort by the White House and the president's lawyers to refuse to cooperate with congressional requests for information and records.

In the case before Mehta, Trump and his business organization sued to block the subpoena issued in April to Mazars USA, an accountant for the president and Trump Organization. Trump's lawyers accused Democrats of harassing Trump and said the subpoena "has no legitimate legislative purpose."

Trump's lawyers, in suing in both Washington and New York in attempt to beat back congressional subpoenas, said congressional investigations are legitimate only if there is legislation that might result from them.

In the New York case, Trump, his business and family have sued Deutsche Bank and Capital One to prevent the financial companies from complying with subpoenas from the House Financial Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee for banking and financial records. A Wednesday hearing is planned in that case.

Even before the ruling, scholars had said Trump's legal argument had little merit and that Congress has broad powers to investigate. </s> A federal judge ruled against President Donald Trump on Monday in a financial records dispute with Congress and said lawmakers should get the documents they have subpoenaed. Trump called it a "crazy" decision that his lawyers would appeal.The ruling by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta comes amid a widespread effort by the White House and Trump's attorneys to refuse to cooperate with congressional requests for information and records. Earlier Monday, Trump directed former White House counsel Don McGahn to defy a congressional subpoena that had compelled McGahn, a pivotal figure in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.In ruling that Trump cannot block the financial records subpoena, Mehta said the Democratic-led House Oversight and Reform Committee had "valid legislative purposes" for its request and that it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations." The committee has said the records will help it consider whether to strengthen ethics and disclosure laws, among other things, said Mehta, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama.Trump pointed to his Democratic predecessor when he told reporters before leaving the White House for a Monday night rally in Pennsylvania that "we think it's totally the wrong decision by, obviously, an Obama-appointed judge."To the committee chairman, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., the judge's decision was a "resounding victory for the rule of law and our constitutional system of checks and balances."Trump's lawyers, in cases from Washington and New York challenging the Democrats' demands, argued that congressional investigations are legitimate only if there is legislation that might result from them. "There is no possible legislation at the end of this tunnel," his legal team said.The White House made the same argument Friday when Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said he would not comply with a congressional subpoena for six years of Trump's tax returns.In the New York case, Trump, his business and family want to prevent Deutsche Bank and Capital One from complying with House subpoenas for banking and financial records. A Wednesday court hearing is planned.In the Washington case, Trump and his business organization are trying to block the subpoena issued in April to Mazars USA, which has provided accounting services to Trump.Even before the ruling, legal scholars had said Trump's argument had little merit and that Congress has broad powers to investigate.Mehta said in his 41-page opinion that there are limits on Congress's authority to investigate, but those limits "do not substantially constrain Congress." He said that as long as "Congress investigates on a subject matter on which 'legislation could be had,'" it is following the Constitution.Mehta said that was true in this case, pointing to the committee's memo outlining four areas of investigation, each of which he said Congress could legislate on.The judge cited the Watergate investigation involving President Richard Nixon and the Whitewater investigation involving President Bill Clinton. He said Congress "plainly views itself as having sweeping authority to investigate illegal conduct of a President, before and after taking office.""This court is not prepared to roll back the tide of history," he said. </s> Washington: A US judge on Monday ruled in favour of a US House of Representatives committee seeking President Donald Trump's financial records from his accounting firm, dealing an early setback to the Trump administration in its legal battle with Congress.

US district judge Amit Mehta in Washington also denied a request by Trump to stay his decision pending an appeal. Last Tuesday Mehta heard oral arguments on whether Mazars LLP must comply with a House of Representatives Oversight Committee subpoena.

Mehta said in Monday's ruling that the committee "has shown that it is not engaged in a pure fishing expedition for the president's financial records" and that the Mazars documents might assist Congress in passing laws and performing other core functions.

Trump is refusing to cooperate with a series of investigations on issues ranging from his tax returns and policy decisions to his Washington hotel and his children's security clearances. Trump's lawyers argued that Congress is on a quest to "turn up something that Democrats can use as a political tool against the president now and in the 2020 election."

Mehta's ruling will almost certainly be appealed to a higher court.

The House Oversight Committee claims sweeping investigative power and says it needs Trump's financial records to examine whether he has conflicts of interest or broke the law by not disentangling himself from his business holdings, as previous presidents did.

Lawyers for Trump and the Trump Organization, his company, last month filed a lawsuit to block the committee's subpoena, saying it exceeded Congress' constitutional limits.

Mehta was appointed in 2014 by Democratic former president Barack Obama, who was often investigated by Republicans in Congress during his two terms in office.

Your guide to the latest election news, analysis, commentary, live updates and schedule for Lok Sabha Elections 2019 on firstpost.com/elections. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram or like our Facebook page for updates from all 543 constituencies for the upcoming general elections. </s> The House Oversight and Reform Committee is one step closer to obtaining President Donald Trump’s financial records—but the end might still be just out of sight.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta upheld the Committee’s subpoena on Monday, arguing that it has the authority to examine Trump’s records.

But what happens next?

Both sides have agreed to a waiting period for the next seven days. In that period, Mazars, Trump’s accounting firm, cannot release any documents.

The first step for Trump’s legal team is to appeal the ruling within that time frame. Trump attorney Jay Sekulow said that they “will be filing a timely notice of appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.”

An earlier request to issue a stay on the ruling from another Trump attorney, William Consovoy, was denied. Mehta ruled that the the public interest in “maximizing the effectiveness of the investigatory powers of Congress” was greater than possible damages to Trump.

Without a stay on the ruling, Mazar’s could theoretically comply with any subsequent request from the House Committee to disclose Trump’s financial records before an appeals court intervenes. The appeals court would have to step in first to prevent the firm from complying.

Even if the case were to make it to the appeals court before any records are shared, legal experts widely expect that Trump’s legal reasoning will not hold up in court. If the subpoena is upheld, Trump would be legally obligated to provide these records to Congress, paving the way for deeper investigations into Trump’s finances and the Trump Organization.

Mazars did not take a legal position on the case and has said that it “will respect the legal process and fully comply with its legal obligations.”

“We disagree with that ruling, it’s crazy,” he told reporters. “As far as the financials are concerned, it’s totally the wrong decision by obviously an Obama-appointed judge.”

“This has never happened to any other president,” he added, arguing that Democrats were seeking an opportunity to even out the score following the conclusion of Mueller’s investigation. “The Democrats were very upset with the Mueller report, as perhaps they should be,” he said.

Mehta’s ruling is the first time a federal court has weighed in on the issue of Congressional subpoena power versus executive privilege. While lengthy litigation on the matter of Trump’s financial records is to be expected, the outcome will have far-reaching implications for similar instances in which the House is seeking other records from Trump and members of his cabinet.

The House has already flagged the ruling to a judge in New York who is currently considering House subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and Capitol One for other Trump financial records.

—Meet the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates you’ve (probably) never heard of

—How New York could become a factor in the 2020 presidential race
Judge Amit Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rules that accounting firm Mazars must comply with a subpoena issued by the United States House Committee on Oversight and Reform to turn over U.S. President Donald Trump's financial records.