Fourth Circuit Scrutinizes Claims Trump Is Illegally Profiting From D.C. Hotel
A federal appeals court panel repeatedly pushed back Tuesday at claims by two attorneys general who say President Trump is illegally profiting from foreign and state government visitors at his luxury hotel in downtown Washington.
At the center of the hearing before a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The clause bans federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval. The attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia, both Democrats, claim government spending at the Trump International Hotel clearly violates it.
In March 2018, a federal judge in Maryland allowed the case to proceed, holding the plaintiffs had “sufficiently alleged that the president is violating the foreign and domestic emoluments clauses of the Constitution by reason of his involvement with and receipt of benefits from the Trump International Hotel.”
The 47-page opinion by U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte also cited the profits derived from operations of the Trump Organization with respect to the hotel.
Messitte adopted a broad definition of the emolument clause ban, saying it includes any profit, gain or advantage received “directly or indirectly” from foreign and state governments. It was the first time a federal judge had interpreted the emoluments clause.
Trump’s attorneys immediately appealed the ruling, arguing the president should be shielded from such legal distractions.
They are also asking the Fourth Circuit to throw out an order from Judge Messitte authorizing scores of subpoenas to federal government agencies and Trump’s private business entities.
Trump has said he’s donated nearly $350,000 to the U.S. Treasury during his first two years in office.
The Fourth Circuit panel that heard the case Tuesday is considering whether the District of Columbia and Maryland have standing to pursue the case, and the request from the president that the litigation be tossed out.
From the outset of Tuesday’s hearing, the judges seemed highly skeptical of the arguments made by Loren AliKhan, solicitor general for the District of Columbia, who represented D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh.
For instance, U.S. Circuit Judge Paul Niemeyer, who was appointed to the appeals court by former President George H.W. Bush, noted that the president has already stepped back from day-to-day management of the hotel.
And even if Trump’s name was scrubbed from the building, foreign dignitaries would still book rooms and events there, Niemeyer said.
Frosh and Racine maintain hotels in Maryland and Washington have been harmed because foreign and state government officials are more likely to stay at Trump’s hotel in an attempt to curry favor with the Republican president.
But U.S. Circuit Judge Dennis Shedd, another George H.W. Bush appointee, suggested Trump’s name on the Washington hotel may actually be benefiting those other businesses because people who object to the president’s policies won’t want to stay under his roof.
Arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan said while he appreciated the judges’ assertions, the emoluments clause only bars payments made in connection with services the president provides in his official capacity.
And he went on to insist Maryland and the District of Columbia have no authority to sue the president in his official capacity over payments the president’s business accepts from other governments.
“The president is unique,” Mooppan said. “That’s why he gets absolute immunity.”
Both Maryland and the District of Columbia have responded to this in court filings, contending that Trump’s alleged misconduct is unrelated to the functions of his office, so absolute immunity does not apply.
U.S. Circuit Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr., the third judge on the panel and a Trump appointee, wanted to know exactly what the attorneys generals would want the president to give up to satisfy the emolument clause requirements.
“My view is it covers any profit, gain or advantage,” AliKhan said.
The panel also roughed AliKhan up on the question of what relief the attorneys generals are seeking.
“You filed the lawsuit and you don’t even know what real world relief would satisfy,” Niemeyer said at one point.
AliKhan offered that ordering Trump’s full divestment of his ownership stake may be an option.
“This case should simply be over,” he said.
Trump won rights to lease the U.S. government’s Old Post Office site in 2012 and opened it as a luxury hotel in October 2016, just weeks before he won the presidential election.
The hotel, located just blocks from the White House, quickly became a hot spot for lobbyists and foreign officials.
According to published reports, a public relations firm working for Saudi Arabia spent nearly $270,000 on food and rooms. The Philippine and Kuwaiti embassies also have thrown parties there.
In The News
WASHINGTON - The Senate confirmed Judge Merrick Garland to serve as the nation's next attorney general on Wednesday, with strong, bipartisan showing of support. When the vote was over, the man once denied a U.S. Supreme Court seat due to intransigent partisanship was approved 70-30m with... Read More
WASHINGTON -- Merrick Garland brought his middle-of-the-road opinions of justice to a Senate hearing Monday to help lawmakers decide whether to confirm him as the next U.S. attorney general. Garland is a federal judge who also is President Joe Biden’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden's nominee for attorney general, will appear for his confirmation hearing vowing to prioritize civil rights, combat extremist attacks and ensure the Justice Department remains politically independent.Garland, a federal appeals court judge who was snubbed by Republicans for a... Read More
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department on Monday withdrew its 2018 legal challenge to the state of California’s net neutrality law after the Trump administration had asked a court to block it. Under then-President Donald Trump, the Justice Department argued that federal law preempts the state... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department rescinded a Trump-era memo that established a “zero tolerance” enforcement policy for migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally, which resulted in thousands of family separations. Acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson issued the new memo to federal prosecutors across the nation... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department’s inspector general is launching an investigation to examine whether any former or current department officials “engaged in an improper attempt” to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Inspector General Michael Horowitz said Monday that the investigation will investigate... Read More