Landmark Supreme Court Case to Investigate Possible Fraud by President Trump
2020 Case Arises From Manhattan District Attorney Subpoena
Case Challenges Article II and Supremacy Clause of Constitution
In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled on a landmark case arising from a subpoena issued by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. The case, Vance v. Trump, challenged the scope of presidential immunity and the supremacy clause of the Constitution. The Court's decision had significant implications for the ongoing investigations into former President Donald Trump's financial dealings.
The case began in 2019 when Vance subpoenaed Trump's financial records from Mazars USA, his accounting firm. Trump challenged the subpoena, arguing that he was immune from criminal prosecution while in office. The Supreme Court rejected Trump's claims, ruling that the president is not immune from criminal investigation.
The Court's decision was a major victory for Vance and other prosecutors investigating Trump. It cleared the way for them to obtain Trump's financial records and continue their investigations. The decision also had broader implications for the rule of law, reaffirming the principle that no one is above the law, not even the president.
Comments