45

According to this Washington Post story: Vance is seeking the records from Trump’s longtime accounting firm, Mazars. Thus Trump himself will not be able to refuse to provide the tax return information. Should the accounting firm refuse, it could be held to be in contempt of court, and fined. It is even possible that a responsible person from the firm would ...


28

The recent SCOTUS ruling on the ability of the Manhattan DA's office to enforce their subpoena applies to the accounting firm Mazars (who has copies of the tax returns and acts as Trump's agent in dealing with the IRS) and not Trump himself. "...Vance is seeking the records from Trump’s longtime accounting firm, Mazars." Supreme Court rejects ...


11

A litigant could issue a subpoena to you demanding the information on your phone relevant to their case. If your employer or you are parties to a lawsuit, you can also be required to provide information through what is a called a "request to produce" issued by one party to another party without a subpoena, and under general information disclosure ...


8

Yes Impeachment proceedings (as are all activities of Congress) are legal proceedings in that they are enabled by the Constitution. While it is true that they are not judicial proceedings, the activities of the legislature as with the executive (like a police interview) and judiciary (like a trial) are legal processes and the Fifth Amendment rights apply. ...


7

A subpoena is a kind of court order. Specifically it is an order to a particular person to appear and testify at a particular time and place. In many but not all cases, the order also requires that person to bring specified records or documents along. That is known as a subpoena duces tecum. In some cases this is used to, order the production of documents ...


6

The best course of action for Barr would be to file an objection to the subpoena in the proper court (probably the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) under or by analogy to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d) (which governs disputes over subpoenas in civil cases in the federal courts), if he thinks that there are matters he cannot lawfully ...


6

A grand jury subpoena needs to not be oppressive or unreasonable: see US v. R Enterprises, 498 US 292. The purpose of a grand jury is to determine if there is probably cause: "the Government cannot be required to justify the issuance of a grand jury subpoena by presenting evidence sufficient to establish probable cause, because the very purpose of requesting ...


6

A subpoena is nothing more than court process compelling someone to testify as a witness or to produce documents in their possession, custody and control, or both, usually in connection with a court case. Most people who are subject to a subpoena are not being asked to offer testimony that could implicate them in a crime. They simply have evidence relevant ...


5

Even within the United States, this would depend upon the jurisdiction involved. Some jurisdictions recognize a legal privilege of a journalist to keep confidential sources secret (also called a "reporter's privilege"), while others do not. There is a split of authority on the question within the various circuits of the U.S. federal court system, and there ...


5

Law enforcement only investigates crimes, and they have significant discretion regarding which crimes to investigate. If they considered a crime to have occurred in your case, they could certainly seek a court warrant requiring Google to turn over IP addresses. More likely, you might have standing to seek relief in civil courts. In such a case, you could ...


5

A witness who disobeys a court order has automatically broken the law. Indeed, this is the most fundamental of laws; you can't decide "If I turn up to the hearing I may be punished for my crime; but not attending isn't against the law, so goodbye." A witness who goes out of the jurisdiction cannot, of course, be punished while there (though when he returns ...


4

You don't really need any reasonable doubts about the currently available evidence to get it started. If an investigating authority thinks a crime has been committed and not yet been adjudicated, it is free to investigate, even if others disagree. There are plenty of avenues for starting an investigation: Congress can exercise its oversight power to ...


4

Contracts are subordinate to the law Any clause in a contract that is unlawful is void. So, if the law compels you to disclose information then even if a contract prohibits it, disclosure is not a breach. However, in most circumstances, law enforcement officers have no power to compel disclosure - you have a right to remain silent. As such disclosure when ...


4

A subpoena is a kind of court order, specifically one requiring the recipient to provide information to the court. A subpoena can be an appropriate order for a company to provide information to the court about one of its users. For example, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society filed a subpoena to compel Reddit to turn over information related to one of its ...


3

A VPN operator has to follow the laws in the country where they operate. If the laws in Sweden say that a VPN operator must keep logs of user activity, then they have to keep logs of user activity. If it makes you feel better: There are two kinds of VPN operators. Those that say they log, and those that lie about logging.


3

Generally speaking, in U.S. law, a provider of a service via the Internet, such as a VPN, is immune from liability for user generated content pursuant to Section 230, so long as a copyright take-down notice is in place is complaints are lodged. So, you do not default to liability or have liability merely as a result of running a VPN. But, there is a second ...


3

Law enforcement officers can obtain information with a search warrant, which is a document issued by a judge or magistrate that authorizes them to search for specific information or evidence based on "probable cause" to believe that it will inform the investigation or prosecution of a crime. A court can also issue a subpoena at the request of a party to a ...


3

When a US Senator or Congressperson poses a question to a private company about some behavior or action of the company, does that carry any legal weight? In other words, (a) is the company required to answer? and (b) if the result is "bad" (however that is defined), can the Senator or Congressperson impose any penalty. Is it all just "showboating" ...


2

Yes. Good luck doing this without legal training or representation.


2

But they have broken the law - a summons is an order of the court, not obeying a court order is the crime of contempt of court (in general, specific jurisdictions have specific penalties for failing to attend a summons). Illness or misadventure are legitimate defences for failing to attend a subpoena. Going out of the jurisdiction isn’t. The public policy ...


2

No, it is not legal for the president or anyone else to ignore a lawful subpoena. Under United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), the president is free to invoke executive privilege in an effort to quash the subpoena. But he may not simply ignore it. It is not clear, though, whether the Georgia judge (who was not a real judge, by the way, but rather an ...


2

Copyright infringement does not involve the police. However, you as copyright owner can subpoena records from a service provider under 17 USC 512(h). There is no records-retention law in the US, so there may be nothing to subpoena. Furthermore, the law only allows you to subpoena records from the providers that host material, not the "infrastructure" ...


2

You are subpoenaing a witness - technically. The affidavit accompanying the documents and saying they are the documents and all of the documents is testimony from a witness. Unless there is reason to doubt that affidavit that witness will usually not be called and the testimony will be accepted by both parties as evidence.


2

A federal court order may be lawfully ignored if it has not be served (i.e. delivered in the manner set forth in court rules) properly upon the person to whom it is directed, but it is exceedingly risky to do so if you have actual knowledge of the order, because "substituted service", "constructive notice" and similar doctrines can cause a court order to be ...


2

The power to issue subpoenas is created by rule, so while an individual Congressman cannot currently issue a subpoena (instead a committee does), the rule can be changed. So it would be possible for a Congressman to issue a subpoena. He could release information obtained via the subpoena, and is immunized from legal repercussions by the Speech and Debate ...


2

Civil claims have statutes of limitations too Usually shorter than 10 years. Therefore, Bob cannot sue anyone for recovery and therefore does not practically own the bike. In some jurisdictions, limitations acts make it explicit that Bob loses title to the goods meaning he doesn’t own the bike de jure as well as de facto. It’s not possible to say what a “...


2

Here is the form, for US District courts. It starts by saying YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following books, papers,documents, data, or other objects It is basically irrelevant how many nanoseconds it takes to obtain the data being subpoenaed. Legally relevant variables are (1) whether a motion to quash the ...


2

Generally, this is allowed under the civil procedure rules of most U.S. jurisdictions. The fact that there is a live suit against some named defendants helps a great deal. The process for doing so isn't necessarily uniform, however, in every U.S. state.


2

If such accusations are reported to the police or some other law enforcement authority, the authorities are likely to investigate. They are not required to investigate, but it is probable that they will chose to do so. They may use whatever methods they think proper to investigate, subject to the limits of permitted procedure in the jurisdiction involved. (...


1

There are NO LEGAL consequences for obedience to a LEGAL subpoena. Digging a bit further, a subpeona is considered legal if issued by an authorized (person/committee/court/ etc). It is Legal on it's face. A judicial review to consider quashing (suspending or eliminating or considering the subpoena ineffective) must be requested by the subject of the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible