Trump’s aggressive view of presidential power is also on display in his effort to block Mazars from complying with Vance’s subpoena.
As with Trump v. Mazars and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, the Justice Department in Vance is playing the good cop to the bad cop of the president’s personal lawyers.
Roberts is an institutionalist, concerned with maintaining the legitimacy of the high court and shielding it as best as he can from accusations of partisanship.
Further boxing Roberts in is the fact that every single lower court to have heard one of these cases has so far ruled against the president.
This might allow a Supreme Court weary of controversy to simply drop the cases without deciding the underlying question, though it would leave the Vance case on the table.

Comments to: The Supreme Court Case That Could Destroy the Balance of Powers

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Attach images - Only PNG, JPG, JPEG and GIF are supported.


Welcome to Typer

Brief and amiable onboarding is the first thing a new user sees in the theme.
Join Typer
Registration is closed.