Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

More twists in multilevel fight by the House to get Trump's tax returns

President Donald Trump

President Trump is fighting multiple battles to prevent access to his tax returns

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The House of Representatives is asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit by President Trump seeking to prevent the House's majority Democrats from getting their hands on the president's New York tax returns.

The request by the House late Monday is the latest volley in what's arguably, besides impeachment, the most consequential current balance-of-powers fight between the legislative and executive branches.


Acting as a private citizen, Trump filed the suit in July in federal court, looking to shortcut any effort by the House Ways and Means Committee to use a freshly enacted New York law to obtain the state returns.

Earlier this month in a separate case, a federal judge dismissed Trump's effort to prevent the president's state returns from being turned over to a New York grand jury. Trump's efforts to get that ruling reversed will be argued Wednesday before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. No matter the outcome, the dispute is almost surely headed to the Supreme Court.

Presidential candidates and presidents have traditionally revealed their tax returns in the name of transparency, but Trump has refused to release his. Proposals to mandate that presidential nominees release their federal 1040s have become a standard part of democracy reform proposals. Such a requirement was included in HR 1, the comprehensive government reform bill passed by the House along party lines in March.

The House's lawyers argued in their filing Monday that Trump's claim should be dismissed because the Ways and Means Committee has not yet asked for the president's New York returns and has not decided whether it will.

"Mr. Trump does not and cannot allege that he is suffering harm," the dismissal request states.

The House lawyers also argue that any president is banned by the Constitution from interfering in the affairs of another, co-equal branch of government.

In filing the suit against the House, Trump's attorneys argued that waiting until a request for the tax returns is made could be too late — they could be disclosed before the president had a chance to be heard in court.

While keeping its options with New York open, the Ways and Means panel has focused more intently on getting access to six years of Trump's tax returns directly from the IRS and its parent, the Treasury Department. Democrats say the committee has a clear right to see Trump's filings under a seldom-invoked section of the tax code that says Treasury "shall furnish" the committee with "any" tax information it seeks about any American citizen.

Administration officials rebuffed a subpoena for those returns this spring, saying they would not help the Democrats with a fishing expedition that lacked a legitimate policy making purpose. The House has now gone to federal court on that matter, as well, arguing the law gives the House total leeway to decide what it needs and why


Read More

The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

A look at this week's congressional agenda, including House votes on Iran, Ukraine, FISA, appropriations, and key legislative priorities.

Getty Images, aire images

Legislative Preview for June 1, 2026

There will be plenty of coverage around the likely drama involved in picking up where House and Senate Republicans left off before this most recent week off. (For a recap, see our last post.) So we’re not going to go into any detail about what might happen with the reconciliation bill (originally only for two departments in the Department of Homeland Security; now enlarged with funding for the President’s ballroom project and overshadowed by the announcement of the President’s plan to pay off political allies with funds from the Department of Justice) or the FISA extension or the housing bill that’s been pingponging between chambers because you can read in sources like Politico about these marquee issue.

We will note that the Iran War resolution postponed in the House before the recess may be up for a vote this week, along with a resolution to remove US troops from Lebanon and a discharge petition (number 8) to put forward a bill authorizing support for Ukraine. Three privileged resolutions, of which one is a discharge petition (meaning it has 218 co-sponsors meaning at least a few House Republican co-sponsors), is a lot for one week. Especially when all three are expressing opposition to various administration stances and might get some House Republican votes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?
white and black quote board
Photo by Brendan Beale on Unsplash

Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?

Modern societies depend on continuity.

Electric grids are built over decades. Infrastructure systems require long investment cycles. Defense planning depends on sustained procurement and strategic consistency. Climate adaptation, energy systems, artificial intelligence governance, public health preparedness, and fiscal stability all require institutions capable of maintaining long-term priorities across multiple administrations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Supporters of President Donald Trump, February 09, 2024 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Political parties are supposed to do two things at once: win elections and govern. Those are not the same skill.

Winning elections requires assembling coalitions large enough to secure power. Governing requires maintaining enough internal agreement to make decisions, negotiate trade-offs, allocate resources, and sustain policy direction once power is achieved.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less