Rule of Law

RELEASE: Trump Loses: Judge Rules Former President May Not Block His Tax Records from Congressional Committee

WASHINGTON – On news today that a Washington, D.C.-based federal judge ruled against former President Donald Trump in his effort to keep his tax records from congressional investigators on the House Ways and Means Committee—which is empowered by federal law to access such materials—Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

Today’s ruling was both the only correct ruling the judge could make, and it was a long time coming—far too long. Chairman Neal first requested these records from the Trump Administration in April 2019, and after the Administration stonewalled that request as it did so many others, the Committee filed its lawsuit to gain access to these materials in July 2019. The judiciary absolutely must move faster in resolving such interbranch disputes directly concerning the power of Congress to investigate the Executive branch. That Congress and the American people have had to wait so long for this result—now nearly a year after former President Trump left office—is unacceptable. 

A portion of the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which recently passed the House, would help address this problem by expediting the adjudication of such cases by a three-judge panel with direct appeal to the Supreme Court. Such a reform would be welcome.

This particular case was straightforward. As we explained in our brief, Congress has repeatedly asked for records from the executive branch as far back as the Washington Administration in 1792, a request in which James Madison and other Framers of the Constitution voted in favor. Moreover, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed Congress’s broad power to investigate, and it has reiterated that the scope of that power is equal to the scope of Congress’s power to legislate. In addition, the statute under which Chairman Neal and the Ways and Means Committee directed their request for these materials was passed specifically to ensure that certain congressional committees could access return information relevant to their investigations and oversight efforts. Finally, the Committee’s request was well within Congress’s power to investigate. The Court recognized many of these points and, even if after significant delay, arrived at the right result.

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Committee on Ways & Means, U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/committee-on-ways-means-v-treasury/

Testimony of CAC Vice President Praveen Fernandes to House Judiciary Committee Hearing on “Civil Enforcement of Congressional Authorities,” June 8, 2021: https://www.theusconstitution.org/testimony/hearing-on-civil-enforcement-of-congressional-authorities/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

Supreme Court not fully sold on foreclosure fairness bid

Courthouse News Service
A showdown over tax foreclosures had the justices considering the striking set of facts that...
Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Oral Argument Focuses on Takings Clause, While Largely Ignoring the Problematic Excessive-Fines-Clause Analysis Applied by the Court Below

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Pung v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
February 24, 2026

50+ Organizations Condemn Federal Authorities for Blocking Minnesota’s Independent Investigation into CBP Killing of Alex Pretti

WASHINGTON, DC — Today marks one month since the killing of Alex Pretti on January...
Rule of Law
February 20, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Rejects President Trump’s Claim of Unilateral Tariff Authority

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump...
By: Simon Chin
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Climate United Fund v. Citibank

In Climate United Fund v. Citibank, the en banc United States of Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can unilaterally abolish a mandatory grant program created by Congress.
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oregon v. Landis

In Oregon v. Landis, the Ninth Circuit is considering when states may prosecute federal officers for state crimes.