Ruled in favor of the das office and the subpoena. But they also remanded the case back to the lower courts for additional consideration. This is an hour and 20 minutes. We will hear from trump the vance. The way we will proceed is that each side will have on interrupted arguments. Then there will be questioning in order of that with judge lavalle first then me and then judge. You will begin and you have reserved three minutes for a rebuttal. Thank you your honor and good morning. Good morning. And may it please the court, on remand the president filed and raised two claims, first that the subpoena and overbroad fishing expedition. And second that it was issued in bad faith in order to harass the president. The District Attorney concedes the Supreme Court is author of the president bring these claims in federal court on remand. The only issue then, on appeal, is whether the allegations of bad faith or plausible. The District Courts determination that they are not could be reversed for
The court heard arguments from the president s attorney in the manhattan District Attorneys office. The central issue surrounds the subpoena for the president s finances as part of an investigation into alleged misconduct i the president s company, the Trump Organization. This is the second time this case has appeared before the court. The first was in october of 2019. It ended up before the u. S. Supreme court in may of 2020 and the justices ultimately ruled in favor of the das office and subpoena. But also remanded the case back to the lower courts for additional consideration. This is one hour and 20 minutes. 20 minutes. We will hear from trump the vance. The way we will proceed is that each side will have on interrupted arguments. Then there will be questioning in order of that with judge lavalle first then me and then judge. You will begin and you have reserved three minutes for a rebuttal. Thank you your honor and good morning. Good morning. And may it please the court, on remand
Interrupted arguments. Then there will be questioning in order of that with judge lavalle first then me and then judge. You will begin and you have reserved three minutes for a rebuttal. Thank you your honor and good morning. Good morning. And may it please the court, on remand the president filed and raised two claims, first that the subpoena and overbroad fishing expedition. And second that it was issued in bad faith in order to harass the president. The District Attorney concedes the Supreme Court is author of the president bring these claims in federal court on remand. The only issue then, on appeal, is whether the allegations of bad faith or plausible. The District Courts determination that they are not could be reversed for several reasons. First, the court stacked the deck against the president by serving these president s are disguised attempt to re litigate category community. The District Attorney also concedes they claim they are no not. The clot plausibility standard to be
To the United States Supreme Court on january 28th 1916. In june of that year, he became the first jewish person to sit on the nations highest court. The third until 1939. Up next on American History tv, and commemoration of the 100th anniversary of his nation a Panel Including u. S. Supreme court Ruth Bader Ginsburg discusses his contribution to american democracy. This program in massachusetts, is about two hours. applause ladies and gentlemen please welcome, lisa m. Lynch interim president of Brandeis University. Good evening, it gives me great pleasure to welcome everyone, students, faculty, alums, trustees staff, and distinguished panelist and friend to this remarkable gathering here at brandeis the university. I want to welcome in particular some of our special guests. Massachusetts attorney general, congressman catherine clark, applause they senator michael baron, james elbridge, and karen silica applause , they representative david and jake offman, applause our very own mayor j
The District Court committed multiple fundamental errors in refusing to dismiss this suit and plaintiffs can i ask you to speak up just a little bit . Bring the microphone a little closer, if you can. And the plaintiffs are fundamentally mistaken in asserting that this court is powerless to correct any of those errors at this time. Now, we have identified two different paths through which this court can have mandamus relief. The Supreme Court made clear that separation of powers considerations are of utmost important when considering mandamus petitions involving the president of the United States. For example, the court quoted chief Justice Marshall to say that in no case would a court be required to proceed against the president as it would against a private individual. And moreover, the court said that the high respect that is due the office of the president must be considered throughout the entire proceeding. Now, what does that imply in this case . It implies the following. Their p