A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a decision allowing congressional committees to subpoena financial records pertaining to President Trump, his children, the Trump Organization and other entities.

The ruling from the Second Circuit Court of appeals calls for the subpoenas issued to Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corporation from the House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees to be enforced, which would allow the committees to obtain the records.

The documents may not include the president’s personal tax returns, as Deutsche Bank claimed they do not have them. The Capitol One subpoena does not list individuals by name but allows for seeking records of the entities' principals, directors, officers, or shareholders.

TRUMP ASKING SUPREME COURT TO BLOCK SUBPOENA FOR HIS TAX RETURNS

“The mandate shall issue forthwith, but compliance with the three subpoenas and the procedure to be implemented on remand is stayed for seven days to afford Appellants an opportunity to apply to the Supreme Court or a Justice thereof for an extension of the stay,” ruled Judge Jon O. Newman, anticipating that Trump will fight the ruling.

Counsel to the President Jay Sekulow told Fox News late Tuesday: "We believe the subpoena is invalid as issued. In light of the Second Circuit decision, we are evaluating our next options including seeking review at the Supreme Court of the United States."

Other circuit court decisions centered on subpoenas for records that do include Trump’s tax returns have been immediately challenged, with the president applying for stays from the Supreme Court, which were granted as the justices determine whether or not to hear the cases.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Those cases involved subpoenas issued to accounting firm Mazars USA, ordering them to turn over Trump’s tax returns. One stemmed from action from the Democratic-led House Oversight Committee and another from an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney.

The Supreme Court granted temporary stays on the subpoenas in both of those cases but have yet to issue decisions on how they will proceed.