Nearly 200 Congressional Democrats Are Suing Trump For Alleged Conflicts Of Interest

By Lauren Holter

Update: Congressional Democrats are filing a lawsuit against President Trump on Wednesday, claiming he violated the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause, which restricts presidents from receiving gifts and benefits from foreign governments. The lawsuit comes just two days after the city of Washington D.C. and the state of Maryland also sued the president for allegedly having conflicts of interest.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the lead senator in the federal lawsuit, told The Washington Post 196 Democrats have joined so far. He added that no Republicans are participating in the lawsuit, but they’re invited to do so if they want.

This story was originally published on June 12, 2017.

President Trump’s week isn’t off to a great start.

In an unprecedented move, attorneys general representing the city of Washington D.C. and the state of Maryland sued the president on Monday, claiming he broke the Constitution’s anti-corruption clauses. The lawsuit, given to The Washington Post, alleges that by keeping ownership of his company, Trump has in effect received money and benefits from foreign governments.

In January, Trump’s transition team held a news conference to show the country the president-elect was transferring the Trump Organization to his sons by moving its assets into a trust. The future president stood beside a table filled with stacks and stacks of manila envelopes he claimed held documents detailing the transfer of power within the business (although reporters weren’t allowed to look at the contents of the folders).

D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine and Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh, both Democrats, don’t think setting up the trust was enough to avoid conflicts of interest. Rather than selling the family empire, Trump remained ownership, and his sons have said they will give him updates on how the business is doing.

On Friday, the Justice Department responded to a lawsuit filed by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) with a lengthy brief arguing that Trump’s business can legally receive money from other governments for things like foreign officials staying at Trump hotels or renting out space in Trump properties. Since taking office, foreign governments including Saudi Arabia and Turkey have booked rooms or event space at Trump-owned hotels.

The problem with the president profiting from a foreign state in any capacity comes down to the fact that his policies and diplomatic decisions could be influenced by said governments (or, at the very least, raise concerns that they were).

“Fundamental to a President’s fidelity to [faithfully execute his oath of office] is the Constitution’s demand that the President … disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers,” the new lawsuit reads, according to The Post. “Never before has a President acted with such disregard for this constitutional prescription.”

Investigating Trump’s financial entanglement with the Trump Organization would require his tax returns, which he refuses to release to the public. If a federal judge orders Trump to give up his financial records and he holds steady on his refusal, the case could end up at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The suit also claims Trump has received illegal favors from the U.S. government, as he was allowed to keep a lease on the Old Post Office building that now houses a Trump hotel (despite a clause prohibiting an “elected official of the government of the United States” from deriving “any benefit”) and has created an atmosphere where states can grant his family business favors.

Racine told The Washington Post, “We’re getting in here to be the check and balance that it appears Congress is unwilling to be.”

More from

Corporate Accountability
 

Intuit, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

In Intuit Inc v. Federal Trade Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the FTC’s authority to issue cease-and-desist orders against false and misleading advertising is constitutional.
Rule of Law
June 20, 2024

Opinion | The tragedy of the Supreme Court’s bump stock ruling

Washington Post
Don’t let technicalities, or a refusal to use common sense, become the enemy of public...
By: Nina Henry
Access to Justice
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court rejects artificial limit on liability for speech-based retaliation by government officers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s Supreme Court decision in Gonzalez v. Trevino, a case in...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court decision keeps the door open to accountability for police officers who make false charges

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Chiaverini v. City...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: In narrow ruling, Supreme Court rejects baseless effort to shield corporate-derived income from taxation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Moore v. United...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Rule of Law
June 19, 2024

The Supreme Court’s approach on ‘history and tradition’ is irking Amy Coney Barrett

CNN
Washington (CNN) — On a Supreme Court where the conservative supermajority increasingly leans on history as a...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Devan Cole, John Fritze