Nearly 200 Democrats sue Trump citing emoluments clause violation

By Brooke Seipel

Democratic members of Congress on Wednesday sued President Trump in federal court, claiming he had violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by accepting foreign funds through the Trump business without Congressional approval.

The Washington Post broke the news early Wednesday morning, reporting that 196 lawmakers had joined the complaint, more than any lawmakers ever to sign on to sue a president.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) led the filing in federal district court, and said Tuesday that while no Republicans had joined the lawsuit, they were welcome to do so.

Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) led the legal effort in the House.

“Trump has conflicts of interest in at least 25 countries, and it appears he’s using his presidency to maximize his profits,” Coyers told Reuters Wednesday.

The Post obtained an advanced copy of the complaint, which argues that the “foreign emoluments clause” in the Constitution requires the president to get the “consent of Congress” before accepting gifts. The suit also alleges that the Trump empire gives foreign governments an incentive to give Trump businesses special treatment.

The 37-page filing comes a day after the attorneys general of Maryland and Washington, D.C., said they will seek Trump’s tax returns in a lawsuit over foreign payments to his D.C.-based hotel.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh said he and his D.C. counterpart, Karl Racine, will seek Trump’s personal financial information — including his tax returns — in a lawsuit alleging the president has committed “unprecedented constitutional violations.”

Frosh and Racine filed a lawsuit against Trump on Monday, claiming his ownership of the Trump International Hotel in D.C. violates two Constitutional clauses barring elected officials from receiving personal gifts and payments. 

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