Seth Abramson (@🏠)+ Your Authors @SethAbramson Attorney. @Newsweek columnist. Proof of Corruption (preorder: amzn.to/2TcvDsH) and NYT bestseller Proof of Conspiracy (amzn.to/2sQBWYL). Professor @UofNH. May. 07, 2019 1 min read + Your Authors

Regarding Trump's tax returns, "shall furnish" is mandatory language—no exceptions. For those who say, "What if the duly appointed Congressional committee chair sought his ex-wife's returns?" the answer is THE IRS WOULD STILL FURNISH THEM but the EX-WIFE would seek an injunction.

1/ And that's *exactly the point of the statute*. Congress wanted to make sure that *no one anywhere in the executive branch* could refuse Congress's request. It could not and did not stop private citizens from seeking injunctions. The GOP has no legal leg to stand on whatsoever.

2/ And incidentally, under the rules of statutory interpretation, it's likely that the only basis for an injunction would be a showing that the Congressman in question had a criminal or otherwise illegal purpose for seeking the return. But that's *not Mnuchin's argument to make*.


You can follow @SethAbramson.



Bookmark

____
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.

Enjoy Threader? Sign up.

Since you’re here...

... we’re asking visitors like you to make a contribution to support this independent project. In these uncertain times, access to information is vital. Threader gets 1,000,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Your financial support will help two developers to keep working on this app. Everyone’s contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support Threader by becoming premium or by donating on PayPal. Thank you.