Rule of Law

Federal Judge Puts Temporary Hold on Subpoenas of Trump’s Business Records

A federal judge on Friday put a temporary halt on subpoenas from congressional Democrats for President Donald Trump’s tax records after an appeals court ordered the judge to take a second look at the issue.

The D.C. Circuit involved itself Friday in a fight to determine if President Trump’s business violates the U.S. Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause that forbids federal officials from accepting money or gifts from foreign governments.

The appellate court panel remanded the case to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, saying he needed to look closer at the underlying law.

“The district court did not adequately address whether— given the separation of powers issues present in a lawsuit brought by members of the Legislative Branch against the President of the United States—resolving the legal questions and/or postponing discovery would be preferable, or whether discovery is even necessary (or more limited discovery would suffice) to establish whether there is an entitlement to declaratory and injunctive relief of the type sought by plaintiffs,” the ruling said.

After previously approving of the subpoenas, Sullivan promptly ordered a temporary halt to them shortly after the ruling of the appeals court. President Trump appealed to the appellate court to block 37 subpoenas covering his financial records.

In its ruling, the D.C. Circuit panel consisting of Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard and Robert Wilkins, all Obama nominees, said the district court “abused its discretion by concluding that an immediate appeal would not advance the ultimate termination of the litigation just because discovery and summary judgment briefing could proceed expeditiously.”

The lawsuit was filed by almost 200 congressional Democrats, including New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary Committee. The complaint alleges that Trump accepted gifts from foreign governments without the approval of Congress.

Elizabeth Wydra, attorney for the Democrats, said in a statement that the appeals court decision was understandable and should be addressed quickly by the district court.

“The courts should not allow the president to run out the clock and evade accountability to his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution— which includes the Foreign Emoluments Clause,” Wydra said.

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
May 20, 2025

CAC Release: Attempts to Intimidate Public Officials Doing Their Jobs Should Concern All Americans

WASHINGTON, DC –  Upon press reports of the Trump Department of Justice’s decision to charge Congresswoman...
Rule of Law
May 16, 2025

CAC Release: At the D.C. Circuit, Everyone Agrees that the Constitution Does Not Permit the President to Unilaterally Shutter the CFPB

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District...
Rule of Law
May 16, 2025

CAC Release: Skepticism About Trump Administration’s Power Grab at Labor Rights Agencies at D.C. Circuit Argument This Morning

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District...
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

J. Doe 4 v. Musk

In J. Doe 4 v. Musk, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland is considering whether Elon Musk’s role in DOGE violates the Appointments Clause and the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Rule of Law
May 9, 2025

Dodd-Frank Authors Join Warren, Waters to Challenge CFPB Firings

Bloomberg Law
Top Democrats, Dodd-Frank namesakes cite separation of powers Amicus brief highlights CFPB’s 2008 financial crisis...
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought

In National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is considering whether the Trump administration’s efforts to unilaterally shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are...