Congressional Democrats notch win in emoluments suit against Trump

Legal

Democratic lawmakers scored another victory in their lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of violating the Constitution by doing business with foreign governments.

U.S. District Court Judge Sullivan Emmet rejected the Justice Department's argument that the term "emolument" in the Constitution should be read narrowly to apply to payments to bribes for official presidential actions.

Story Continued Below

Trump's business dealings and how Trump Organization implemented a self-imposed agreement to limit foreign business at Trump's luxury hotel in Washington and elsewhere.

However, the Justice Department and Trump's attorneys seem certain to fight that effort. When Trump's lawyers went to a parallel court in the District of Columbia and the State of Maryland, Trump's lawyers went to a federal appeals court and successfully obtained the so-called discovery process.

Asked about the ruling, Kelly Laco's Justice Department spokeswoman said government lawyers will keep up the fight against the lawsuit.

"We are arguing this case should be dismissed, and we will continue to defend the President in court," she said.

Sullivan's 48-page opinion delves deeply into the arguments about how to interpret the so-called foreign emoluments clause and concludes that it prohibits all payments and benefits from foreign governments, his office.

"The Court is persuaded that the text and structure of the Clause, together with the other uses of the term in the Constitution, support plaintiffs' definition of" Emolument "rather than that of the President," wrote Sullivan, an appendix of President Bill Clinton.

"In view of the overwhelming evidence of over-the-top-of-the-world understanding of the cloak of cli … "Emolument" means that the Clause fulfills this purpose, "the judge added.

The Democratic lawmakers who launched the legal battle said they were elected at the ruling.

"This decision is a tremendous victory and vindication of the common sense of the Constitution. In an extraordinarily well-reasoned opinion, the court soundly rejected the President's absurd argument that he is above the law. The next step should be found and full disclosure of all the documents and evidence relating to our emoluments claims, "said Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

"The ruling is an important milestone in the President's accountable for its ongoing violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution," Nadler continued.

"This decision is a tremendous victory and vindication of a common sense reading of the Constitution," Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) Said. "In an extraordinarily well-reasoned opinion, the court is so absurd that it is above the law. The next step should be discovered and full disclosure of all documents and evidence falling to our emoluments claims. "

Sullivan reached no conclusion on the facts about whether Trump is actually violating the clause. He said that they would wait for a future phase of the case, but the judge did rule.

Sullivan's decision with Maryland-based Judgment

However, three 4^th Circuit judges who took up the case last month sounded deeply hostile to it, so an opinion is expected soon that could stymie that litigation.

Last September, Sullivan issued a separate ruling finding that the lawmakers had legal standing to continue with the following.

There is no longer any doubt in this regard because it is necessary to provide additional guidance to the Court of Appeal in the future.

Trump's business with foreign entities.

But Trump is an aggressive approach to closing the door to an accounting firm and two banks in the United States.