Attorneys General shocked by court decision authorizing Donald Trump to "take advantage" of the presidency

The Attorneys General of Maryland and the District of Columbia denounce the decision of a court of appeal to dismiss Wednesday their action in judicial compensation against President Donald Trump, which supports the idea that the President can benefit financially from his private activities without substantial checks and balances. .

In a statement to Newsweek, a spokesman for Washington DC Attorney General Karl Racine and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, two of the leading plaintiffs in a lawsuit alleging that Trump is unduly profiting from his position as president through his private activities , said that the fourth circuit appeal court "was cheated" in Wednesday's decision.

"Although the court described a host of reasons why this case is unique, it ignored the most extraordinary circumstance: President Trump boldly takes advantage of the president's office in a manner that No other president of history has ever imagined and that the founders have specifically sought – in the Constitution – to prohibit, "said the spokesman in a written statement.

"We have not abandoned our efforts to hold President Trump accountable for violating the nation's original anti-corruption laws," the statement said.

The lawsuit concerns the president's real estate empire and is investigating whether businesses in Maryland and the District of Columbia have lost revenue due to competition with the popular Trump Hotel network, a notoriety possible by the ascension of Trump to the presidency. and the decision of his company to accept reservations from foreign entities.

A spokesman for the Justice Department, who represents Trump in numerous lawsuits for emoluments, said in a written statement to Newsweek that he is "happy that the fourth circuit has decided unanimously to classify this affair extremely imperfect".

"The court correctly determined that the plaintiffs had wrongly asked the courts to go beyond their constitutional role by reviewing the chair's compliance with the emolument clause provisions," Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly said. Laco.

Complainants could ask the complete list of Fourth Circuit judges to review the court decision or ask the Supreme Court to hear the case. A spokesman for the complainants would not confirm at Newsweek what they planned to do in response to Wednesday's decision.

The decision stems from a complex series of legal maneuvers in which the plaintiffs attempted to keep the case out of the jurisdiction of the court of appeal. This strategy failed after Trump's lawyers had managed to get the Fourth Circuit's intervention regarding a complaint unrelated to Wednesday's decision: if the President, as an individual, is absolutely at fault. Safe from such lawsuits.

The fourth circuit used the issue of immunity as an opportunity to review the foundation of the case, as the District of Columbia and Maryland are even able to bring a lawsuit under the clause on the emoluments of the Constitution. Rejecting the trial judge's findings, the three-judge panel found that the plaintiffs did not have standing and decided to dismiss the case.

There are currently two other lawsuits pending in federal court against the president, which have never been discovered before.