Vance’s office said in its filing with the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals that courts have previously rejected the claim the subpoena is overbroad and issued in bad faith. The office further argued that Trump has failed to “demonstrate any irreparable harm” if the subpoena to his longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA, remains enforceable and that the public interest weights against his effort to “interrupt presumptively valid state criminal process.”
“In short, although Appellant’s claim of ‘temporary absolute immunity’ has been rejected at every level of the federal courts, by continuing to litigate this action he has effectively obtained temporary absolute immunity by delaying the grand jury’s receipt of the evidence it seeks,” Vance’s office wrote. “As the district court observed, ‘[j]ustice requires an end to this controversy.'”
In its filing Thursday, Vance’s office also noted that Trump’s argument to the appeals court “depends on the implausible premise that, at the time the Mazars Subpoena issued, the grand jury’s investigation was limited to payments Michael Cohen made in 2016.” Trump, however, “has been put on notice throughout this litigation that the grand jury’s investigation was not limited to Cohen’s 2016 payments,” Vance’s office wrote.