“The sole question before the court — Is the House Oversight Committee’s issuance of a subpoena to Mazars USA LLP for financial records of President Donald Trump and various associated entities a valid exercise of legislative power? — is fully briefed, and the court can discern no benefit from an additional round of legal arguments,” Mehta said.
Mehta, an Obama appointee confirmed in 2014, gave all sides until Monday to file any further comments ahead of oral arguments previously set for 11 a.m. Tuesday in Washington.
The announcement means that any appeal of a decision in the case could reach an appeals court by the summer.
The lawsuit over the subpoena is one of a growing number of efforts by the president to shield his personal finances from investigators, including congressional Democrats, state lawmakers and regulators, looking into aspects of his life and business.
The lawsuit has been a flash point in a standoff over the constitutional balance of powers between the legislative and executive branches, with congressional Democrats accusing Trump of stonewalling or slow-walking them, and with Trump’s lawyers countering they would not tolerate a campaign of “congressional Presidential harassment.”
Cummings’s panel last month subpoenaed Mazars seeking documents to corroborate testimony of the president’s former lawyer Michael Cohen, who said at a congressional hearing that Trump intentionally misreported the value of his assets for personal gain.
Other House panels have requested Trump’s banking records and tax returns, while his company also faces inquiries from New York state regulators and is defending itself against plaintiffs in two lawsuits alleging that his company violates the Constitution by doing business with foreign governments.
In suing the House as well as his banks and accounting firm, Trump’s lawyers argued the president’s past personal dealings are irrelevant to the legislative branch’s fundamental duty of writing bills. They accuse Democrats of “assuming the powers of the Department of Justice, investigating (dubious and partisan) allegations of illegal conduct by private individuals.”
A lawyer for the Trump Organization did not immediately reply Thursday to a request for comment on the judge’s notice.
Cummings’s committee has called Trump’s bid to quash the subpoena a long-shot bid to delay the unearthing of politically damaging information about Trump until after the 2020 election, and to obscure from the public ongoing conflicts of interest by officials charged with executing the nation’s laws.
“Trump’s attacks on the Committee’s investigations amount to nothing more than political histrionics and hyperbole,” the panel’s lawyers wrote, calling the subpoena consistent with Congress’s duties to weigh legislation, conduct oversight, manage spending of tax dollars and informing the public.
Mazars attorney Henry F. Schuelke has said the firm took no position on the case.
Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said Judge Amit P. Mehta was confirmed in 2004. It was 2014.
David A. Fahrenthold contributed to this report.