Lots of lawyers talking about “the plain meaning of the statute” re the 1924 law the Dems are citing to obtain Trump’s tax returns. But the smart lawyers I know say that certainly this SCOTUS could read a claim on constitutional grounds, thus freeing it to strike down the law.
-
-
or any
-
But a different scotus might indeed see the language of the statute as plain and unambiguous—normally Gorsuch would insist on that reading. Doubt it in this case.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Obtuse crank
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.