WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is, again, turning to the Supreme Court to keep his tax returns and financial records away from New York City prosecutors investigating possible hush-money payments during the 2016 presidential race. The president's lawyers on Tuesday asked the justices to block a lower court's ruling allowing New York prosecutors to enforce a grand jury subpoena for Trump's tax records as part of the criminal investigation.In addition to the alleged hush-money payments, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance's office, which is seeking eight years of financial documents, has also indicated that prosecutors are looking at possible criminal activity at the Trump Organization.Trump's taxes: Key takeaways from blockbuster NYT reportTrump's latest move marks the second time his attorneys have asked the high court to intervene in the case. The Supreme Court last summer rejected Trump's claims he is absolutely immune from criminal investigations while in office. The court, though, sent the case back to the lower court to resolve other legal issues.This now comes in the middle of a heated confirmation battle to replace the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and just weeks before a highly contentious presidential election. CONFIRMATION HEARINGS:Amy Coney Barrett says she hasn't made promises on rulingsThe 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in early October that Trump's accountant must comply with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office's subpoena for his tax records. The court rejected Trump's other claims that the subpoena was too broad and was issued in bad faith to harass the president. The appeals court kept a stay in its decision in place while Trump appeals to the Supreme Court.Trump's legal team has claimed that the grand jury's investigation is limited only to hush money payments allegedly made to two women who claimed to have had affairs with Trump before the 2016 presidential election. Trump has denied the affairs.But in its 35-page opinion, the appeals court said this "amounts to nothing more than implausible speculation," and grand juries "must necessarily paint a broad brush" when issuing subpoenas. During oral arguments in September, the appeals court judges seemed equally unpersuaded.Fight over tax returns:Trump must turn over tax records to New York prosecutor, appeals court saysTrump attorney faces skeptical court:Trump attorney fights to block disclosure of tax returnsJudge Pierre Leval said allegations that the subpoena was issued in bad faith were "highly contrived." Judge Robert Katzmann said grand juries have broad authority and wondered whether the president's attorney is asking them to change the way grand juries have always operated. And Judge Raymond Lohier pressed Trump's attorney, William Consovoy, on whether there's a version of the subpoena he would not view as too broad."Similarly, the President's allegations of bad faith fail to raise a plausible inference that the subpoena was issued out o

свернуть