While he holds the office of the president, Donald Trump, his family, his businesses and his business associates enjoy total legal immunity from investigation, subpoena, indictment or prosecution for anything done during or before he became president, including if he shot someone dead in broad daylight in Manhattan — at least that’s what his lawyers have argued in federal court over the past eight months.
These arguments, if successful, would advance a decadeslong project to reorder the constitutional balance of powers and essentially exempt the president from oversight.
The medium-impeachment strategy the Democrats have embraced does not convey the full measure of Trump’s crimes against the Constitution, and it could even distract from the full damage he has done to the republic.
The Supreme Court is about to tell us how willing it is to protect Donald Trump.
The Supreme Court announced on Friday that it will hear Trump v. Mazars, a case involving whether House investigators may obtain Trump’s financial records — most likely including his tax forms — from Trump’s accounting firm. Mazars will be heard alongside two other cases, Trump v. Vance and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, which also concern the scope of Trump’s immunity from investigation.
Deutsche Bank, like Mazars, concerns a congressional subpoena. Vance involves a Manhattan prosecutor’s effort to obtain Trump’s financial records.