The House Ways and Means Committee is expected to receive former President Donald Trump’s IRS tax returns within a week after a federal appeals court on Thursday denied Trump’s request to suspend the release.
The Supreme Court could still intervene if Trump appeals.
A three-judge DC Circuit Court of Appeals panel decided not to suspend the filing of the former president’s tax returns after the full appeals court denied Trump’s request to review a decision notice authorizing the publication of the declarations.
The case is one of several longstanding lawsuits where the Democratic-led House is trying to access years of financial records tied to Trump, particularly his tax returns.
Trump’s attorneys handling the case did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The committee’s chairman, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Richard Neal, said in a statement that Trump “tried to delay the inevitable, but once again the court has upheld the strength of our position.”
“We’ve waited long enough – we need to begin our oversight of the IRS’ Mandatory Presidential Audit Program as soon as possible,” Neal added.
In August, a three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals approved the committee’s request to obtain Trump’s tax returns from the IRS. Trump then appealed to the entire DC Circuit, saying the court made “several errors” in its decision in favor of the House.
“The decision here will control future disputes between Congress and the executive branch — including those of sitting presidents — which almost all arise in this circuit,” Trump said.
Following Thursday’s DC Circuit decision, former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Shan Wu told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on “The Situation Room” that the decision is significant in that it violates standards. legal issues surrounding the presidency.
“What’s really important is that this is a gradual reduction of this type of no-fly zone that has developed around the presidency,” Wu said. “Congress can strengthen its surveillance capacity if the courts say, ‘yes, it is legitimate surveillance.’ And that actually gives the Supreme Court a chance to rebalance things here.
This story has been updated with additional details.