

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Claiming the president has "absolute immunity" from legal action both in his official capacity and as a private individual, lawyers representing Donald Trump called on a federal court to toss out a lawsuit accusing him of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause by accepting payments from foreign governments at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.
Norm Eisen, former White House ethics official and chair of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, said that if the court accepts Trump's argument, it would effectively mean the president "is beyond the reach of the law."
Filed by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia in June, the suit accuses Trump of committing "unprecedented constitutional violations" by refusing to "disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers."
As the Associated Press notes,
Ethics experts had warned that this kind of situation could arise because Trump refused to divest from his financial holdings when he became president. Trump instead promised to turn over profits from foreign government business at Trump Organization properties to the U.S. Treasury. The first such annual payment was made earlier this year for $151,470 but the company would not say how that figure was determined.
In his court filing, Trump lawyer William Consovoy argued the Maryland-D.C. suit "has the potential to divert the president's attention from his official duties. The Supreme Court has concluded that the costs to the nation of allowing such suits to distract the president from his official duties outweigh any countervailing interests."
As AP reports, Consovoy also "argued that federal officials can only be targeted for accepting unconstitutional payments in their official government function and not as private citizens. But in the case of the president, Consovoy added, Trump is also 'absolutely immune' from legal action in his official capacity."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Claiming the president has "absolute immunity" from legal action both in his official capacity and as a private individual, lawyers representing Donald Trump called on a federal court to toss out a lawsuit accusing him of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause by accepting payments from foreign governments at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.
Norm Eisen, former White House ethics official and chair of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, said that if the court accepts Trump's argument, it would effectively mean the president "is beyond the reach of the law."
Filed by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia in June, the suit accuses Trump of committing "unprecedented constitutional violations" by refusing to "disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers."
As the Associated Press notes,
Ethics experts had warned that this kind of situation could arise because Trump refused to divest from his financial holdings when he became president. Trump instead promised to turn over profits from foreign government business at Trump Organization properties to the U.S. Treasury. The first such annual payment was made earlier this year for $151,470 but the company would not say how that figure was determined.
In his court filing, Trump lawyer William Consovoy argued the Maryland-D.C. suit "has the potential to divert the president's attention from his official duties. The Supreme Court has concluded that the costs to the nation of allowing such suits to distract the president from his official duties outweigh any countervailing interests."
As AP reports, Consovoy also "argued that federal officials can only be targeted for accepting unconstitutional payments in their official government function and not as private citizens. But in the case of the president, Consovoy added, Trump is also 'absolutely immune' from legal action in his official capacity."

Claiming the president has "absolute immunity" from legal action both in his official capacity and as a private individual, lawyers representing Donald Trump called on a federal court to toss out a lawsuit accusing him of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause by accepting payments from foreign governments at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.
Norm Eisen, former White House ethics official and chair of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, said that if the court accepts Trump's argument, it would effectively mean the president "is beyond the reach of the law."
Filed by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia in June, the suit accuses Trump of committing "unprecedented constitutional violations" by refusing to "disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers."
As the Associated Press notes,
Ethics experts had warned that this kind of situation could arise because Trump refused to divest from his financial holdings when he became president. Trump instead promised to turn over profits from foreign government business at Trump Organization properties to the U.S. Treasury. The first such annual payment was made earlier this year for $151,470 but the company would not say how that figure was determined.
In his court filing, Trump lawyer William Consovoy argued the Maryland-D.C. suit "has the potential to divert the president's attention from his official duties. The Supreme Court has concluded that the costs to the nation of allowing such suits to distract the president from his official duties outweigh any countervailing interests."
As AP reports, Consovoy also "argued that federal officials can only be targeted for accepting unconstitutional payments in their official government function and not as private citizens. But in the case of the president, Consovoy added, Trump is also 'absolutely immune' from legal action in his official capacity."