WASHINGTON – Democrats say they are planning their "next steps" after the White House on Thursday rejected a request for documents pertaining to President Donald Trump's communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Earlier this month, the Democratic-led House intelligence, foreign affairs and oversight committees sent a letter requesting for the substance of Trump and Putin’s conversations in person and by phone. They also asked for any documents related to the conversations, information on whether the talks had any impact on U.S. foreign policy and information on whether Trump tried to conceal any evidence of them.

White House Counsel Pat Cipollone rejected the request on Thursday, arguing longstanding precedents prevent Congress from obtaining such documents and conducting oversight of the president's communications on foreign affairs.

"The president must be free to engage in discussions with foreign leaders without fear that those communications will be disclosed and used as fodder for partisan political purposes," Cipollone writes, adding that "No foreign leader would engage in private conversations with the president, or the president's senior advisers, if such conversations were subject to public disclosure."

No detailed record:President Trump went to 'extraordinary lengths' to hide details of Putin meetings, report says

'A whole big fat hoax':After news reports scrutinizing Russian ties, President Trump declares: 'I never worked for Russia'

In a joint statement, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel and House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings hinted that the fight over the documents was not over and called the denial just part of a "troubling pattern by the Trump administration of rejecting legitimate and necessary congressional oversight."

"We are also concerned by the disingenuous assertions and representations in the letter. In previous Democratic and Republican Administrations, the White House made officials available for interviews and produced to the Congress all manner of internal documents and communications regarding 'the conduct of foreign relations' by the President and White House and National Security Council staff. In fact, the Obama Administration produced records describing the President and Secretary of State’s calls with foreign leaders. The Congress also received voluminous records from agencies involved in the conduct of U.S. foreign relations, such as the State Department, Defense Department, and other agencies."

The Democrats ended saying, "President Trump’s decision to break with this precedent raises the question of what he has to hide. We will be consulting on appropriate next steps. Congress has a constitutional duty to conduct oversight and investigate these matters, and we will fulfill that responsibility."

'We may have no choice':Trump-Putin meeting: Top Democrat says he's considering subpoena for interpreter's notes

Their March request included asking for interviews with "linguists, translators or interpreters" who in any way listened to Trump and Putin’s conversations. The two leaders met privately in Helsinki in July for more than two hours with only interpreters present, and the White House has not said what they discussed.

In his Thursday denial, Cipollone cited specific court cases, including Supreme Court rulings, arguing against releasing such documents and information. He said that Trump "must be free to consult with his senior advisers — to ask frank questions, solicit and receive recommendations, weigh options, and debate policy alternatives."

Cipollone argues if these documents were released it could affect foreign relations and set a bad precedent with future presidents. He says in the letter that the request is unfair and seems to be a set up for critics to scrutinize the administration.

"It appears that the practice of the committees has been to request information that the committees have no legal entitlement to receive and then unfairly criticize the White House for simple adhering to consistent bipartisan past practice in its response," he writes.

Contributing: Associated Press