Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

Peopel crossing the border at night

Migrants cross into the United States from Mexico through an abandoned railroad on June 28, in Jacumba Hot Springs, Calif.

Qian Weizhong/VCG via Getty Images

Have 25 million undocumented immigrants entered the U.S. and stayed during the Biden-Harris administration?

This fact brief was originally published by Wisconsin Watch. Read the original here. Fact briefs are published by newsrooms in the Gigafact network, and republished by The Fulcrum. Visit Gigafact to learn more.

Have 25 million undocumented immigrants entered the U.S. and stayed during the Biden-Harris administration?

No.

Authorities estimate the number of undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. during the Biden-Harris administration and remained at far less than the 25 million that Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance claimed.

Keep ReadingShow less
People holding signs against Project 2025 and Donald Trump

Protestors rally against Project 2025 and Donald Trump in New York's Times Square.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Project 2025: How anti-trans proposals could impact all families

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Willie Carver has been a teacher in Kentucky since 2007, now working with college students. For over two years, he has worked with the American Federation of Teachers’ National LGBTQ+ Task Force, an advocacy arm of the influential labor union created to counter the rise and repression brought by anti-LGBTQ+ laws.

One of the country’s most draconian anti-trans measures became law in Carver’s home state last March. The law has required teachers to put politics before the wellbeing of their own students and reshaped how students see and treat each other. It bans them from being taught about gender identity or sexual orientation, using restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity and learning about human sexuality. The law also made gender-affirming care illegal for trans youth.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Trump

Former President Donald Trump's platform includes reinstating Schedule F on "day one" of his second term.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Project 2025: The Schedule F threat to democracy

Barker is a program officer at the Charles F. Kettering Foundation and the lead editor of the foundation’s blog series “From Many, We.”

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

One small change to the rules classifying federal employees could significantly advance the U.S. toward authoritarianism. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s plan to staff the government with far-right movement activists, hinges on an executive order that could be implemented with surprising ease.

While much attention has been paid to the initiative’s extremist policy agenda, a rules change called Schedule F would massively expand presidential power and fundamentally change the character of the federal government. Understanding the Schedule F threat is critical to stopping it.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol
Richard Fairless/Getty Images

Congress must get serious about its capacity or cede power to courts

Swift is director of government capacity at POPVOX Foundation.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down a cornerstone of administrative law known as the Chevron doctrine represents a seismic shift in the balance of power between the three branches of government.

After 40 years of relying on federal agencies to interpret legislative ambiguities when implementing regulations, it’s now up to courts to discern congressional intent. The Supreme Court did not “return” power to Congress, but it did put the onus on an under-resourced legislative branch to be much more clear in writing laws. If Congress fails to exercise its lawmaking power, it will cede power to the judiciary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rep. Mary Miller

Rep. Mary Miller introduced a resolution to role back a Biden administration rule related to Title IX.

Bill of the month: Redefining 'sex-based discrimination'

Rogers is the “data wrangler” at BillTrack50. He previously worked on policy in several government departments.

This month IssueVoter and BillTrack50 take a look at joint resolution that would disapprove of and disapply a rule from April 2024 that redefined the term “sex-based discrimination” to include sexual harassment, parental status or gender identity as it relates to Title IX regulations for educational programs receiving federal funding.

Keep ReadingShow less