A major blow was dealt to the former US president after the Supreme Court refused to intervene in his favor to cancel a decision issued by a federal judge to hand over the financial records related to him to a New York City attorney.

The move, which came more than a month after the end of Trump's rule, constitutes a setback in the judicial battle that the former president has been fighting for years in an effort to prevent the publication of his tax records, which it has always argued are subject to review, and can only be viewed after the completion of their review, without specifying A date for that.

Trump is the first US president since the era of Richard Nixon (1969-1974) not to publish his tax returns voluntarily.

The Supreme Court's decision was decisive and with the consensus of its nine judges, including 3 appointed by Trump himself (during his presidency) in addition to 3 others affiliated with the Republican Party.

Trump challenged the justice system to keep its finances and business practices confidential, and keep them from scrutiny.

The Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for Cyrus Vance, Attorney General of the Southern Manhattan District to obtain these documents.

Vance sought these documents to assist in a criminal investigation into possible insurance, tax and financial fraud by the former president or his companies.

Recent Supreme Court ruling gives Vance access to records related to Trump's (European) financial and business data

Trump denies any financial wrongdoing, and his attorneys assert that the documents that Attorney General Vance wants to see are irrelevant to Trump's practices under investigation.

Vance is also investigating financial misconduct related to Trump's payment, through his former lawyer Michael Cohen, to sums of money - in illegal ways - to two women: porn actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model, Karen McDougall, who claim to have had an affair with Trump before. To be president.

"Catching politician"

In a statement, Trump denounced the case, describing it as "political persecution and hunting," saying, "The Supreme Court should never have allowed these actions to happen, but it did."

The Supreme Court's decision does not mean the end of the path for the former president, as he can still formally appeal the case before it, but it does not seem that it will take any other direction, especially with the consensus of its nine judges on the decision and the absence of any support for Trump's position.

New York Times journalist Jesse McLenny tweeted that the former president, in his very long statement, did not appear to be able to understand or distinguish between the investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney's office and the New York City government, which he accuses of examining "nearly every transaction I made of any Time ago, including seeking tax returns. "

In his (quite long) statement, the former president does not seem to make, or understand, the distinction between an investigation by @ManhattanDA and the city of NY, which he accuses of "looking at almost every transaction I've ever done, including seeking tax returns. "

https://t.co/pzFoi2F9T4

- Jesse McKinley (@jessemckinley) February 22, 2021

Last summer, the Supreme Court rejected Trump's demands, ordering that the case be returned to lower courts for more litigation.

Writing the court's opinion at the time, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. said, "No citizen, not even the president, is above the joint duty to present evidence when he is charged in a criminal case."

Trump then appealed the subpoena again, arguing that it was politically motivated, and Attorney General accused Vance of being a Democrat.

Trump was convicted by a New York district court, and the decision came unanimously by 3 judges before the Federal Court of Appeals in New York.

Then Trump's lawyers went to the Supreme Court for a second time.

No head immunity

The New York Times published a series of investigations based on a collection of Trump tax documents obtained, showing that he paid only $ 750 in federal income tax in 2016 and 2017.

The former president denied these reports, describing them as "fake news."

After Trump's term ended on the twentieth of last month, he lost the benefit of legal protection that the law provides for the office of president.

During the years of his rule, the Ministry of Justice confirmed that the President could not be charged while he was in power.

Over the past four years, Trump has benefited from presidential immunity from a number of prosecutions.

It is now possible, in theory and from a legal standpoint, that Trump will be charged with criminal or civil charges.

Trump holds an American newspaper titled his innocence from previous impeachment before the Senate on February 6, 2020 (European)

Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, has pleaded guilty to a range of crimes, served a prison sentence, and was released and resigned to his home due to the repercussions of the Corona virus outbreak.

Cohen admitted arranging hundreds of thousands of dollars of illegal payment to silence the women during the 2016 election campaign, and Trump has denied these allegations.

Cohen said he acted under Trump's direction and coordination.

Criminal or political?

The trial of a former president, like Trump, would be fraught with political risks, especially in a country so divided as the 2020 presidential and congressional elections expressed.

"Political calculations cannot be excluded from big cases like the trial of a former president," said Kimberly and Hall, a former federal attorney general and professor of law at the University of Baltimore.

And Hall indicated that she "understands that President Biden has already indicated that he does not care about trying Trump, which is logical given that he has a lot that needs to be used in critical issues such as confronting the Corona pandemic or the issue of climate change or reviving the economy."

Biden had indicated in television interviews that he would leave "the decision to the Ministry of Justice and the Attorney General," but added that pursuing the accusations of Trump "may cause more damage than gains."

Legal troubles coming

Trump's judicial troubles are not limited to this issue alone, as there is a civil investigation by Letitia James, Attorney General of New York State, into Trump's companies, and whether the Trump Organization has incorrectly inflated the value of its assets for the purposes of obtaining loans and raising the value of insurance, then reducing the value for tax purposes .

Although the investigation is civil, it may turn into a criminal investigation, according to what the investigators may reveal.

Trump is also facing an investigation in Georgia over his leaked phone conversation and is trying to pressure the state secretary to "find thousands of ballot papers for him so that he can win the state in the recent presidential elections."

And the legal risk to Trump does not end there, as the former president faces a defamation lawsuit brought by two women who say he sexually assaulted them, allegations he denies.

Hale, a legal expert, expects that Trump's judicial troubles may be like "a potential avalanche, especially from someone who has been using the legal system to his advantage."