Judge Mehta's ruling

A district judge on Monday upheld a subpoena issued by the House Oversight and Reform Committee for President Trump's financial records, dealing a blow to White House efforts to resist the Democrats’ investigations.

In a 41-page opinion, Judge Amit Mehta, an Obama appointee, found that the panel, under the leadership of Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), had valid reasons for requesting the president’s financial records from the accounting firm Mazars, even though they predated his entering office.

  The Hill

Why was it necessary to state that he's an Obama appointee? Is the author insuating that judges are partisan?

"These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the Committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations," Mehta wrote.

The ruling comes just hours after the White House ordered former White House counsel Don McGahn to defy a subpoena from the House Judiciary Committee for his testimony at a hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Trump’s lawyers will also be in federal court in New York to try and quash similar subpoenas issued by other House Democrats for financial records from Deutsche Bank and Capital One.

[...]

[Mehta] noted that the panel's "broad investigative power is not new," pointing to investigations conducted by the committee while it was under Republican control.

[...]

Mehta also denied a request from Trump lawyer William Consovoy that he issue a stay on the ruling while they appeal the decision to a higher court, meaning that the House Democrats could quickly obtain the president's financial records if Mazars complies with the request before an appeals court potentially intervenes.

[...]

"[T]he President is subject to the same legal standard as any other litigant that does not prevail.”

Prepare for death threats, Judge.

The judge stated in his opinion that both parties of the lawsuit have agreed to a seven-day waiting period after any ruling before Mazars releases any documents.

For what? Trump to get packed and out of the country?

Legal experts have told The Hill that it’s unlikely Trump’s legal reasoning will hold up in court, but that the lawsuits could be an attempt to at least delay lawmakers from getting their hands on the documents.

Some might call that obstruction of justice.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Judge Mehta's Opinion document

UPDATE: