Attorneys General Allege That Trump’s Business Enterprises Violate U.S. Constitution –

A night view of the main entrance to the Trump International Hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. : Glynn Wilson

By Glynn Wilson –

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a major blow to President Donald J. Trump and a historic court ruling, a federal judge ruled Wednesday that a lawsuit alleging that Trump’s business enterprises violate the emoluments clauses of the U.S. Constitution may proceed to trial.

Court Order

Federal District Judge Peter Messitte in the U.S. District Courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland denied a request from the Department of Justice to dismiss the case brought by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia.

The U.S. District Courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland: Glynn Wilson

It’s the first ruling ever in a federal court to define “emolument,” according to attorneys. The Emoluments Clause bars any president from personally profiting from his dealings with state governments or foreign governments.

“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State,” according to Article I of the Constitution.

Court Opinion

“This is an historic decision,” Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh said in a statement reacting to the ruling. “Judge Messitte held that the emoluments clauses of the United States Constitution are ‘broad anti-corruption provisions’ that can be enforced in court.”

“No other President has ignored the prohibitions on receipt of payments and benefits from foreign governments or additional benefits from the United States or any individual state,” Frosh continued. “The court saw through President Trump’s attempts to excuse his unconstitutional behavior, rejected his self-serving definition of ‘emoluments,’ and held that the term ‘extends to any profit, gain, or advantage’ of more than de minimis value, received by him ‘from foreign, the federal, or domestic governments.’ We now look forward to proceeding with discovery and litigating the merits of this case. Americans shouldn’t have to question whether their president is making decisions in their best interest rather than his own. Americans deserve a president who serves the people, not his bottom line.”

See our detailed original coverage of the case here.
Federal Lawsuit Alleges Trump Violates Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses

In Wednesday’s ruling, Judge Messitte rejected the “cramped interpretation” of the term offered by the Justice Department. He wrote that the term applies to “any profit, gain or advantage” of value that Trump has gotten from foreign, the federal or domestic governments.

“Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that the President has been receiving or is potentially able to receive ’emoluments’ from foreign, the federal and state governments in violation of the Constitution,” wrote Messitte.

Until the Trump administration, emoluments have been an obscure part of the Constitution, said John Mikhail, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, whose research was cited in Messitte’s opinion. 


“I think it comes as a surprise to many people that there are terms in the Constitution, individual words that at this late date, 230-plus years into the operation of the Constitution, that those have never been authoritatively adjudicated,” Mikhail told NPR.

The judge’s decision clears the way for the Maryland and District of Columbia legal teams to begin the discovery process, which could include requesting sensitive financial information from President Trump and the Trump Organization LLC.

The Justice Department, which represents Trump in this matter, argued the clause is not relevant to Trump’s businesses. The judge clearly disagreed.

Wednesday’s ruling is the second victory for Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, who were granted legal standing to sue Trump in March. They allege their jurisdictions are economically and financially harmed as political and diplomatic officials shift their business to Trump’s downtown Washington, D.C., hotel from nearby convention centers owned by those governments.

“Today’s historic ruling is a substantial step forward to ensure President Trump stops violating our nation’s original anti-corruption laws,” Racine said. “The Constitution is clear: The president can’t accept money or other benefits from foreign or domestic governments.”

After opening shortly before the 2016 election, the Trump International Hotel has quickly became a favorite gathering place for the president’s supporters, who frequently hold fundraisers and conferences there. Foreign governments have also frequently held events and put dignitaries up in the hotel.

The hotel is housed in the Old Post Office, which is owned by the federal government and leased by the Trump Organization. Legal challenges to the Trump Organization’s lease on the property have not succeeded.

More original coverage.
American Non-Voters Deserve Donald Trump: He’s the Perfect American President for Our Time