DOJ asks appeals court to block subpoenas for Trump bank records

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Monday asked a federal appeals court to block House subpoenas for President Trump’s personal financial information.

In a Monday brief, the DOJ argued that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit should block subpoenas from House committees who are seeking Trump’s records at Deutsche Bank and Capital One.

{mosads}Trump has sued to prevent Capital One and Deutsche Bank from turning over records of their business with the president to the House Financial Services, Intelligence and Oversight and Reform committees.

Those committees issued subpoenas for Trump’s financial records in April as part of a broad investigation into Russian money laundering and financial crimes in the U.S.

The District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled in May that the House subpoenas should proceed, but the requests are on hold while Trump appeals the case.

The Justice Department argued in its Monday brief that the district court erred in approving the subpoenas without asking lawmakers to narrow the scope of their requests. The DOJ said lawmakers have failed to prove a legitimate legislative reason for the subpoenas, which they claim clash with constitutional protections for executive power.

“There is no objective reason for a congressional investigation into the general problem of money laundering and other illicit financial transactions to focus on the President and his family,” the department argued.

“The Committees have not connected the dots between the ‘undeniably broad’ scope of these subpoenas and the general legislative purpose that the House has articulated: closing regulatory loopholes that permit corrupt financial activity,” the department wrote.

The DOJ has also previously weighed in on another court fight for Trump’s financial records, in the case involving a subpoena for documents from Mazars, an accounting firm, being sought by the House Oversight and Reform Committee. Earlier this month, the department similarly said in a court filing before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the committee had not provided a legislative reason for seeking those documents.