He has to show what the precise harm would be if the tax returns are released. That harm can't be speculative or just a risk. He must present specific facts to support his claim of harm.
Then he must show that that harm would be irreparable - that that it could not be remedied with money or other compensation.
That would be very difficult in this situation, especially since he repeatedly said he would release his returns as soon as he got through his fake audit. So he's already publicly agreed to do that which he now says would cause him such enormous harm that a federal court must step in and stop someone else from doing it.
I can't imagine how he could convince a court at this point that release of tax returns - something every other president has done in the last half century - would cause him any harm, irreparable or otherwise, unless, of course, he admits there's something in his returns that is embarrassing or illegal. And since being embarrassed or implicated in a crime is not the kind of harm an injunction is intended to prevent, I think he's screwed on this one.
= new reply since forum marked as read
