Coalition of major media outlets moves to unseal redactions on Trump-related Deutsche Bank document

Coalition of major media outlets moves to unseal redactions on Trump-related Deutsche Bank document
President Donald J. Trump disembarks Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House Wednesday evening, Aug. 21, 2019, returning from his trip to the American Veterans (AMVETS) 75th National Convention in Louisville, KY. (Official White House Photo by Tia Dufour)

From Barack Obama to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush, every U.S. president elected after the 1970s has publicly released their tax returns — every one except Donald Trump, who has said he will do so after an IRS audit is completed. Journalists, seeking information about Trump’s tax returns, have been pursuing Trump’s Deutsche Bank records — and on Wednesday, a coalition of major media organizations filed a motion in federal court to unseal redacted names on documents having to do with his taxes.


The motion was submitted by attorneys representing a who’s-who of mainstream media outlets, including the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Associated Press (AP), CNN and Politico. And in their motion, they argued that the American public has a right to know what is in those documents.

The motion asserted, “Deutsche Bank recently informed the court that it has tax returns relating to some of the Trump-related entities or individuals, but redacted the names of these entities and/or individuals from its submission to the court. Through this motion, (the coalition) seek to enforce the public’s First Amendment and common law rights of access to judicial proceedings and the records therein — specifically, to unseal the redacted names so as to be able to inform the public which persons’ or entities’ tax returns are at issue in this litigation.”

Attorneys for Deutsche Bank have defended the redactions as being legally necessary in order to protect the privacy of clients. But the coalition of media organizations disagrees.

In their motion, they explained, “There is no genuine privacy concern implicated by Deutsche Bank confirming what is already widely understood: that it has copies of certain of the president’s or his affiliates’ financial records. But it would set a disturbing precedent to allow redactions of such rudimentary facts to go unchallenged, particularly in a case involving a sitting president.”

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

DonateDonate by credit card

Close

Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Alternet All Access and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.