Emoluments case alleging Trump violated
Constitution can proceed: U.S. judge
Send a link to a friend
[July 26, 2018]
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - A federal judge on Wednesday
rejected President Donald Trump's bid to dismiss a lawsuit accusing him
of unconstitutionally accepting gifts from foreign and state governments
through his Washington hotel while occupying the White House.
U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte's decision clears the way for the
attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia, who brought
the case, to pursue interviews with Trump Organization employees and
review financial records to learn if the president broke the law.
The lawsuit accused Trump of violating the Constitution's "emoluments"
clauses, which bar federal officials from accepting gifts from foreign
governments without congressional approval, and the president from
receiving gifts from states. They are designed to thwart corruption and
improper influence.
"It's an historic decision," Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh said
in an interview. "There has never been another president who has tested
the emoluments clause. This is the first time we have had a president
who has walked up to and, in our view, walked way over the line."
Messitte had in March narrowed the lawsuit to focus on profits stemming
from Trump's ownership, through the Trump Organization, of the Trump
International Hotel, a popular spot for foreign officials near the White
House.
But in Wednesday's 52-page decision, the Greenbelt, Maryland-based judge
rejected Trump's "cramped" view that emoluments were limited essentially
to bribes.
Messitte said the plaintiffs had "convincingly argued" that emoluments
had a broader meaning, consistent with how even George Washington used
the term in a 1776 proclamation.
"The clear weight of the evidence shows that an 'emolument' was commonly
understood by the founding generation to encompass any 'profit,' 'gain,'
or 'advantage,'" Messitte wrote.
[to top of second column]
|
President Donald Trump walks from Marine One as he returns from
Kansas City, Missouri, to the White House in Washington, U.S., July
24, 2018. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
He also said emoluments include "profits from private transactions,
even those involving services given at fair market value."
The U.S. Department of Justice, which defended Trump, is determining
its next steps "to continue vigorously defending the President,"
spokesman Andy Reuss said in an email. "We continue to maintain that
this case should be dismissed."
Karl Racine, the D.C. attorney general, countered in a statement:
"325 million Americans shouldn't have to wonder if the president is
putting his personal financial interests ahead of the national
interest."
A Manhattan federal judge had in December dismissed a similar
lawsuit by plaintiffs including the watchdog Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, saying they lacked standing
to sue.
Roughly 200 House and Senate Democrats filed their own lawsuit in
June 2017, demanding that Trump obtain Congressional approval before
accepting emoluments. That case is pending.
The case is District of Columbia et al v Trump, U.S. District Court,
District of Maryland, No. 17-01596.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by James
Dalgleish, Steve Orlofsky and Susan Thomas)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|