Nearly 200 Democrats sue Trump over foreign payments

By Andrew Pestano

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said nearly 200 Democrats in Congress filed a lawsuit Wednesday against President Donald Trump over foreign payment violations.

Blumenthal on Tuesday said the lawsuit has drawn at least 196 Congressional plaintiffs. No Republicans have joined the legal action but are invited, Blumenthal said.

The Democrats involved argue Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clause by profiting from business deals involving foreign governments and continuing to do so without the consent of Congress.

During a call with reporters, Blumenthal said Trump has “repeatedly and flagrantly violated” the Emoluments Clause. Blumenthal said Trump has “never sought the consent of Congress” for profits received in deals in more than 20 countries where his businesses operate.

The Emoluments Clause of the Constitution says no person holding a federal office of profit or trust shall — “without the Consent of the Congress” — accept any “present, emolument, (or) office … from any king, prince or foreign state.”

Although the president holds a federal office of “trust,” the clause does not name the president specifically, unlike other clauses in the Constitution — which has generated division over interpretation. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled whether the Emoluments Clause applies to the president.

Blumenthal said Democrats believe Trump “must either sell his vast holdings … or he must tell us and disclose now” all the benefits he receives from foreign governments. The Democrats also want access to Trump’s tax returns and business records.

The lawsuit by Democrats follows a similar lawsuit filed by attorneys general in Maryland and the District of Columbia also alleging Trump is violating the Emoluments Clause. The legal action cites his hotels, golf courses and other commercial properties, including Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

More from

Immigration and Citizenship
June 25, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Misunderstands Immigration Law—and the Presumption of Extraterritoriality—in Decision about Asylum-Seekers at the Border

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s decision this morning in Noem v. Al Otro...
By: Smita Ghosh
Access to Justice
June 23, 2026

CAC Release: In Deeply Disappointing Decision, Supreme Court Ignores Ordinary Meaning of Statute and Denies Victims of Torture Their Day in Court

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Cisco Systems v. Doe,...
By: Harith Khawaja
Rule of Law
June 23, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Decision on Excessive Fines Clause Reaches the Wrong Result, But Gets the Standard Right

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Pung v. Isabella County,...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Access to Justice
June 23, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court’s Conservative Supermajority Undermines Important Right Created by Congress

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Landor v. Louisiana Department...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Rule of Law
June 22, 2026

The Supreme Court Is About to Decide Four Cases Defining Trump’s Power

The Wall Street Journal
CAC President Elizabeth Wydra spoke to the Wall Street Journal about the major decisions left...
Rule of Law
June 21, 2026

Trump DOJ in CRISIS MODE

Legal AF
CAC Vice President Praveen Fernandes joined the Legal AF podcast to discuss Todd Blanche's nomination...