Debates over the proper scope of executive power in the United States have been a feature of U.S. law and politics dating back to before the nation’s founding. Article II of the Constitution vests the president with “the executive power” and the power to act as the military’s Commander in Chief, but the post-9/11 presidency has been characterized as a striking expansion of executive power, particularly in the area of national security.
Latest in Executive Power
The U.S. may have attempted to kill a second Quds Force commander simultaneous with the Soleimani attack, this time in Yemen. The situation underscores the confusion that besets the self-defense justification.
The Soleimani strike was likely within the president’s domestic legal authority to pursue. But in certain ways, it may push that authority’s limits.
An overview of cases in which government officials are seeking information regarding the president—specifically, Trump’s financial records and tax returns, witness testimony, and the Mueller report grand jury material.
A judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ruled that President Donald Trump's border wall emergency proclamation, which gave the adminstration the ability to use funding for other activities to pay for construction of the border wall, was unlawful. The ruling also permanently enjoined the heads of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of the Interior and the Treasury Department from using emergency construction funds for the wall other than those appropriated by Congress in the 2019 Consolidated Appropriations Act.
President Trump filed a petition for a writ of certiorari for the Supreme Court to hear the case involving the House Oversight Committee's subpoena to Trump's accounting firm Mazars for his financial records. The document is available here and below.
The Trump administration’s refusal to engage the committee has a small problem: two federal obstruction of justice statutes.
A decision with limited immediate consequences could have more impact over the long run in elevating the role of the president’s lawyers in future conflicts with Congress.
On Nov. 14, President Trump petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari to hear a case involving Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance's subpoena to Trump's accounting firm Mazars for the president's tax returns. The petition filed by the president, a brief in opposition from Vance and an amicus curiae brief from the solicitor general are available below.
Petition for Writ
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has denied President Trump's petition for a rehearing en banc in Donald J. Trump v. Mazars, LLP et al. The order was issued per curiam with Judges Karen Henderson, Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao dissenting. The court also denied a motion for a panel rehearing. Both orders can be view below.
Denial of Rehearing En Banc
Federal judges in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that President Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP, must hand over eight years of financial documents pursuant to a subpoena filed by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. The court held that presidential immunity from state criminal processes should not extend to investigative steps. The ruling can be found here and below.