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

Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board

In Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can ignore critical civil service laws when removing Immigration Judges.
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes