The Supreme Court saved its biggest decision for the final day of its current term.

Democrats thought they were about to score their most important victory.

But Nancy Pelosi never saw this Supreme Court defeat coming.

For years, the fake news media and Democrats in Congress have been after the President’s tax returns.

There is no requirement for presidential candidates to release their tax returns and this only became a custom in 1968.

Donald Trump said his taxes were under audit and did not release his returns.

Fake news reporters and Democrats became convinced that Trump’s tax returns held smoking guns linking Trump to a series of crimes from Russian collusion to money laundering.

Democrats in Congress and Democrat New York City District Attorney Cy Vance subpoenaed Trump’s tax returns going back to 2011 as well as financial records from institutions the Trump Organization did business with.

The President’s lawyers objected to these subpoenas arguing the Democrats had no legitimate legislative subpoena and that a District Attorney could not investigate the President while in office.

In matching 7 to 2 decisions, the Supreme Court handed Democrats a small victory while granting the President the overall triumph.

In the case of the Democrats’ subpoena, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, rejected the President’s claim of absolute immunity.

But the justices unanimously remanded the case back to a lower court to reconsider separation of powers issues.

And Roberts wrote there were serious issues to consider.

“Without limits on its subpoena powers, Congress could ‘exert an imperious control’ over the Executive Branch and aggrandize itself at the President’s expense, just as the Framers feared,” Roberts wrote. “Congressional subpoenas for information from the President … implicate special concerns regarding the separation of powers. The courts below did not take adequate account of those concerns.”

A similar verdict played out in the Manhattan District Attorney’s attempt to seize the President’s personal financial records.

The justices wrote that the President could provide evidence in a criminal investigation and that since these were personal records, they did not place an undue burden on the President.

“In the absence of a need to protect the Executive, the public interest in fair and effective law enforcement cuts in favor of comprehensive access to evidence. Requiring a state grand jury to meet a heightened standard of need would hobble the grand jury’s ability to acquire ‘all information that might possibly bear on its investigation,’” Roberts stated.

But again, the justices kicked this case back to the lower courts.

While the President may not prevail in the lower courts, he can always appeal and the biggest victory was preventing the Democrats from being able to selectively leak tidbits from his tax returns during the general election campaign.

If you want American Patriot Daily to keep you up to date on any new developments in this ongoing story and the rest of the breaking news in politics, please bookmark our site, consider making us your homepage and forward our content with your friends on social media and email.