“There is nothing to indicate that these are anything but ordinary documents that are normally relevant for an investigation by the grand jury into possible financial or corporate misconduct,” the judges judged.
“We examined all of the president’s remaining objections on appeal and found no basis for a reversal,” the verdict said. The three-person jury dismissed the president’s lawsuit with prejudice, which means he cannot reanimate it for these reasons.
The tax returns and other financial documents are not handed over to the prosecutors immediately. The appeals court suspended the subpoena based on a mutual agreement between the Manhattan district attorney and the president̵
Jay Sekulow, an attorney for the president, said Wednesday they would ask the Supreme Court to uphold the verdict. A Manhattan District Attorney spokesman Cyrus Vance declined to comment. A Justice Department representative said it was reviewing the verdict.
The lawsuit was the president’s latest attempt to block the subpoena against Mazars USA after the Supreme Court ruled this summer that the president did not have broad immunity from a subpoena from the state grand jury. Following this decision, the president’s lawyers changed their complaint against the district attorney because the subpoena was too broad and maliciously issued to harass the president. US District Court judge Victor Marrero dismissed these arguments last month and Trump’s lawyers appealed.
Trump’s attorneys argued that the district attorney’s investigation was limited to hush money payments Michael Cohen made to cover up Trump’s alleged affairs and that the subpoena, which includes personal and business records from January 2011, was too broad. Trump’s attorneys argued that the district attorney’s investigation was limited due to an earlier subpoena to the Trump Organization that only related to the hush money payments.
The appeals court rejected Trump’s argument that it was “nothing more than implausible speculation”.
“It is far from reasonable to conclude that a single subpoena would determine the full scope of a grand jury’s investigation, especially when it comes to complex financial investigations,” the judges wrote.
In court files, prosecutors said the investigation was much broader than these payments and suggested it could include tax fraud, bank fraud and insurance fraud.
Expecting the appeals court to reject the president’s legal arguments, attorneys on both sides agreed to suspend enforcement of the subpoena so that the president’s attorneys could ask the Supreme Court to “suspend” the verdict.
Under the agreement approved by the Court of Appeals, the president’s lawyers have five calendar days to file a motion to the Supreme Court to suspend the subpoena. The district attorney would have five days to file a response and the president’s lawyers would have two days to respond.
Five Supreme Court justices must agree to grant residence. The court currently has eight members following the death of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Republicans in Congress are pushing for Trump’s candidate Amy Coney Barrett to be confirmed to fill the seat over the next few weeks.
If the Supreme Court does not grant residency, it is possible that Trump’s attorneys could continue to ask the court to hear the case, but at that point the subpoena would be executed and the documents turned over to investigators. If the court grants residency, the subpoena litigation would continue beyond the election.
CNN’s Evan Perez and Ariane De Vouge contributed to this report.