The first case we will argue today is case 19715, donald trump versus masers usa. Mr. Strawbridge. May appease the court, the subpoenas here are unprecedented in every tenth before these cases no court upheld the use of congress subpoena power to demand the personal records of a sitting president , no kitty to committee had tried to tell of the personal papers, let alone to the purpose of considering potential legislation. There is a reason this is the first time a Congressional Committee has attested a gambit. It is long been understood since congress and subpoena power is applied, it is auxiliary ends subordinates, when that power is deployed against the president , and must yield any longstanding tradition or compelling showing of need, the committee can satisfy neither condition here and that should decide this case. The committees contend of the subpoenas satisfy the limits this court has applied to congressional subpoenas. But their arguments would render those limits meaningless
Justice and made please the court, the issues here are unprecedented in every sense. Before these cases, no court had ever upheld the courts use of subpoena powers to the records of a sitting president with a broad swath of the president s personal papers to the let alone purpose of the a potential legislation. There is a reason this is the first time a set has attempted such a gambit. Because, grist has subpoena power, it is subordinate and when that power is deployed against the president , it must yield absent any longstanding tradition or compelling showing of need. The committees consent is neither condition and that should decide this case. The committees contend the subpoenas satisfy the limits this court has always applied to congressional subpoenas. But the arguments would render meaningless but the arguments would render those limits meaningless. They claim congress can you subpoenas to uncover individual wrongdoing simply because that the always informed efficiency of existi
President yee good afternoon and welcome to the april 21, 2020, meeting of the San Francisco board of supervisors. Madam clerk, will you please call the roll. Clerk thank you, mr. President. [roll call]. Clerk mr. President , you have a quorum. President yee thank you. Everybody, please place your hands over your heart, and would you please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] president yee thank you. Supervisor safai supervisor safai is present. Clerk thank you, supervisor safai. President yee okay. On behalf of the board, i would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgovtv who air the meetings and make the transcripts available online. Madam clerk, are there any announcements . Clerk yes, mr. President. During the Board Meeting, members will participate online as though they were present in person, and the public is invited to participate in the meeting in the five following ways. First, you are welcome to submit via email at board. Of. Supervisors sfgov.
Okay, the rules committee will come to order. Before i give my opening statement, i just want to read a guidance from the attending physician. And we asked him specifically about the use of face coverings during proceedings like these. And while he is not mandated their use, he did share that, and i quote, my preference is that members retain their face covers when speaking as speaking is an activity which can release virus particles, especially if the speaking is of high spirited nature. And ive never had a meeting in the rules committee that hasnt been of a high spirited nature. So were going to leave it up to individual members to decide. But i think i will to be cautious here, im going to keep mine on. Others will be mindful of the reason why there is guidance on this issue. It has been roughly three months since the First Community transmission of covid19 was discovered in the United States. Since that time, our world has changed dramatically. There are now more than 1. 3 million
To President Trumps financial records. This is an hour and a half. The honorable, the chief justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court of the United States give their attention, god save the United States and this honorable court. The first case we will argue today is case 19715, donald trump versus masers usa. Mr. Strawbridge. May appease the court, the subpoenas here are unprecedented in every tenth before these cases no court upheld the use of congress subpoena power to demand the personal records of a sitting president , no kitty to committee had tried to tell of the personal papers, let alone to the purpose of considering potential legislation. There is a reason this is the first time a Congressional Committee has attested a gambit. It is long been understood since congress and subpoena power is applied, it is auxiliary ends subordinates, when that power is deployed against the president , and must yield any longstanding traditi