周四，最高法院做出了一项历史性的裁决，裁定总统有罪唐纳德·特朗普在职期间不能要求刑事调查的“绝对豁免权”，可能需要遵从纽约大陪审团的传票，寻找他的个人财务记录。
这决定对特朗普来说是一次重大的法律失败，尽管公众在选举日之前极不可能看到总统的纳税申报单或财务记录。如果这些记录在大陪审团调查中被上交，根据法律，它们必须保密。
首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨以7票对2票的多数意见得出结论说，“任何公民，甚至总统，在刑事诉讼中被要求出示证据时，都绝对不能超越出示证据的共同义务。”
曼哈顿地区检察官塞鲁斯·万斯正在为特朗普和他的企业寻求10年的纳税申报单，作为调查可能的州税务欺诈的一部分。
罗伯茨说:“总统既不能绝对免于国家刑事传票寻求他的私人文件，也没有资格提高标准的需要。”
但罗伯茨承认了总统的独特地位，将此案发回下级法院，让特朗普“酌情提出进一步的论点”，比如关于传票对其公务造成负担的主张。
高等法院的两位总统任命人布雷特·卡瓦诺(Brett Kavanaugh)和尼尔·戈尔苏奇(Neil Gorsuch)在一份赞同意见中写道:“法院今天一致认为，总统并不拥有州刑事传票的绝对豁免权，但也一致同意将此案发回地区法院，在那里，总统可以酌情对传票提出宪法和法律上的反对意见。”
2020年6月25日，华盛顿白宫，唐纳德·特朗普总统登上海军一号后在南草坪散步。亚历克斯·布兰登/美联社，档案
鉴于进一步的诉讼，目前还不清楚纽约大陪审团多久可能会收到这些文件。
万斯在一份声明中说:“这是我们国家司法体系的巨大胜利，也是我们国家的立国原则，即任何人——甚至是总统——都不能凌驾于法律之上。”“我们的调查因这起诉讼而推迟了近一年，我们将一如既往地遵循大陪审团遵循法律和事实的庄严义务，无论这些法律和事实会导致什么结果。”
克拉伦斯·托马斯法官和塞缪尔·阿利托法官都提出了不同意见，这表明考虑到特朗普的工作性质，他理应得到传票的更多尊重。
阿利托写道:“法院的决定有可能损害总统的职能，也没有提供真正的保护，防止全国2300多名地方检察官使用传唤权。”
该决定被披露后不久，特朗普在推特上表示，此事是“政治起诉。”
最高法院将案件发回下级法院，继续辩论。这都是政治起诉。我赢得了米勒政治迫害和其他比赛，现在我必须在一个政治腐败的纽约继续战斗。对现任总统或政府不公平!
——唐纳德·特朗普(@realDonaldTrump)2020年7月9日
过去，法院给予“广泛的尊重”。但不是我!
——唐纳德·特朗普(@realDonaldTrump)2020年7月9日
但是总统的律师说他们“很高兴”。
华盛顿国会山最高法院，2020年6月29日。帕特里克·塞曼斯基/美联社
“我们很高兴在今天发布的决定中，最高法院暂时阻止了国会和纽约检察官获取总统的税务记录。美国总统杰伊·塞库罗(Jay Sekulow)的律师在一份声明中表示:“我们现在将着手在下级法院提出更多的宪法和法律问题。”
周四晚些时候，特朗普在白宫的一次活动上表示，他对这些裁决感到部分满意，称它们“纯属政治性质”，是“政治迫害”和“骗局”的一部分
特朗普在与拉美裔领导人的一次圆桌会议上表示:“嗯，法院的裁决基本上是从头再来，把所有东西都送回下级法院，然后从头再来，所以，从某个角度来看，我很满意。”“从另一个角度来说，我不满意，因为坦率地说，这是一场政治迫害，这种事情以前从来没有人见过。这纯粹是政治迫害。这是个骗局。就像穆勒调查是个骗局一样，我赢了。这又是一个骗局。这纯粹是政治问题。”
在特朗普诉马扎尔斯·美国·LLP和特朗普诉德意志银行股份有限公司&资本一号案中，众议院委员会传唤了特朗普在入主白宫之前的一系列个人和商业记录，包括银行对账单、聘书、个人支票、贷款申请和纳税申报单。他们表示，这些信息对于起草联邦道德法、反腐败立法和涉及总统的竞选财务规则至关重要。
当特朗普的个人会计师事务所以及他和他的企业使用的三家金融机构最初被传讯时，在这两起案件中，特朗普都进行了干预，阻止第三方遵守规定。他在联邦下级法院的各个级别都失败了。
特朗普是唯一一位在任期间没有公开发布纳税申报单或放弃主要商业利益的现代美国总统。
“最高法院今天确认总统不能凌驾于法律之上。法院裁定特朗普总统必须像我们其他人一样遵守法律。美国公民自由联盟国家法律部主任大卫科尔说:“这包括对他的税务记录的传票作出回应。”
匹兹堡大学法学院的副教授菲利普·哈克尼说:“在这些案件中还有很多可玩的。”
“SCOTUS在万斯案中作出了有利的裁决，但我们可能永远也不会很快看到特朗普的纳税记录。”特朗普仍然有他可以提出的辩护理由。”
Supreme Court rejects Trump claim of 'absolute immunity' from grand jury subpoena for tax returns
In a history-making decision on Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled PresidentDonald Trumpcannot claim "absolute immunity" from criminal investigation while in office and may need to comply with a New York grand jury subpoena seeking his personal financial records.
Thedecisionis a major legal defeat for Trump, although it remains highly unlikely the public will see the president's tax returns or financial records before Election Day. If the records are turned over in the grand jury probe, by law they must remain secret.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing the 7-2 majority opinion, concluded that "no citizen, not even the President, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding."
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance is seeking 10 years of tax returns for Trump and his businesses as part of a probe into possible state tax fraud.
"The President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need," Roberts said.
But in a nod to the unique position of the presidency, Roberts returned the case to a lower court to allow Trump to "raise further arguments as appropriate," such as claims about the subpoenas' burden on his official duties.
"The court today unanimously concludes that a president does not possess absolute immunity from a state criminal subpoena, but also unanimously agrees that this case should be remanded to the district court, where the president may raise constitutional and legal objections to the subpoena as appropriate," wrote Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, the president's two appointees to the high court, in a concurring opinion.
Given the further proceedings, it was not immediately clear how soon the New York grand jury could potentially receive the documents.
“This is a tremendous victory for our nation’s system of justice and its founding principle that no one – not even a president – is above the law," Vance said in a statement. "Our investigation, which was delayed for almost a year by this lawsuit, will resume, guided as always by the grand jury’s solemn obligation to follow the law and the facts, wherever they may lead.”
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito both filed dissenting opinions, suggesting President Trump deserves greater deference from subpoenas given the nature of his job.
"The court's decision threatens to impair the functioning of the presidency and provides no real protection against the use of the subpoena power by the nation's 2,300+ local prosecutors," Alito wrote.
Trump tweeted shortly after the decision was revealed that the matter is a "political prosecution."
The Supreme Court sends case back to Lower Court, arguments to continue. This is all a political prosecution. I won the Mueller Witch Hunt, and others, and now I have to keep fighting in a politically corrupt New York. Not fair to this Presidency or Administration!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)July 9, 2020
Courts in the past have given “broad deference”. BUT NOT ME!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)July 9, 2020
But the president's attorneys said they were "pleased."
"We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress and New York prosecutors from obtaining the President’s tax records. We will now proceed to raise additional Constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts," Counsel to the President Jay Sekulow said in a statement on the New York case and on a second case in which the court blocked four congressional subpoenas, also sending the matter back to a lower court.
Later Thursday, Trump, speaking at a White House event, said he is partly satisfied with the rulings, calling them "purely political," part of a "political witch hunt" and a "hoax."
"Well, the court rulings were basically starting all over again, sending everything back down to the lower courts and to start all over again, and so, from a certain point, I’m satisfied," Trump said during a roundtable with Hispanic leaders. "From another point, I’m not satisfied because frankly, this is a political witch hunt, the likes of which nobody’s ever seen before. It’s a pure witch hunt. It’s a hoax. Just like the Mueller investigation was a hoax that I won. And this is another hoax. This is purely political."
In the case of Trump v. Mazars USA LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG & Capital One, House committees subpoenaed a sweeping array of Trump personal and business records predating his time in the White House, including bank statements, engagement letters, personal checks, loan applications and tax returns. They say the information is critical to drafting of federal ethics laws, anti-corruption legislation and campaign finance rules involving presidents.
When Trump's personal accounting firm and three financial institutions used by him and his business were initially subpoenaed for the information, in both cases, Trump intervened to block the third parties from complying. He has lost at every level in lower federal courts.
Trump is the only modern American president to have not publicly released tax returns or divest from major business interests while in office.
“The Supreme Court today confirmed that the president is not above the law. The court ruled that President Trump must follow the law, like the rest of us. And that includes responding to subpoenas for his tax records," said ACLU national legal director David Cole.
“There’s a lot of play left in these cases," said Philip Hackney, an associate professor in the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
"SCOTUS ruled in favor in the Vance case, but we may never see Trump’s tax records anytime soon. Trump still has defenses he can raise," Hackney said.
