Understanding Congressional Oversight and Presidential Immunity
Created on September 24, 2020
This program, presented by Ashwin Phatak, Appellate Counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center, will review two major 2020 Supreme Court decisions in the areas of congressional oversight and presidential immunity. In Trump v. Mazars, the Court decided that Congress can subpoena the President's financial records but must meet a heightened showing of relevance and need. Meanwhile, in Trump v. Vance, the Court held that presidential immunity did not preclude a New York grand jury from obtaining the President's tax returns as part of a criminal investigation. Together, these cases represent an important effort by the Court to check the President, but they may have little effect in practice given that both cases were remanded for further proceedings. This program will discuss these cases, analyze the legal theories at issue, the Court's decisions, and assess the impact these decisions may have on congressional oversight and presidential power going forward.
This program will benefit attorneys who practice in or are merely interested in the areas of congressional oversight or presidential immunity.
- Analyze the basic legal framework for cases involving congressional oversight and presidential immunity
- Discuss the two major cases argued and decided this term: Trump v. Mazars, about congressional oversight, and Trump v. Vance, about presidential immunity from judicial process
- Explore the ramifications of these two decisions on the current President, and on the American presidency more broadly
Gain access to this course, plus unlimited access to 1,700+ courses, with an Unlimited Subscription.Explore Lawline Subscriptions