Speaker 1: Well, now it's time for our Bloomberg Law Report. Let's
Speaker 1: get to the legal stories we are watching this morning
Speaker 1: with Steve Podusk in the Bloomberg Washington Newsroom. Sponsors of
Speaker 1: bipartisan legislation introduced in the House and Senate say the
Speaker 1: measure seeks to protect US elections from foreign interference by
Speaker 1: increasing with transparency of online political ads. A measure introduced
Speaker 1: in the Senate would allow people to buy into Medicare
Speaker 1: via the individual health insurance market, starting with rural areas
Speaker 1: that have few insurers offering plans, and companies that try
Speaker 1: to register offensive trademarks after our recent Supreme Court ruling
Speaker 1: legalizing them will have to offer good evidence. Lawyers say.
Speaker 1: Victories for the Asian American rock band The Slants and
Speaker 1: Washington Redskins will likely not mean a barrage of registrations.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law everything you need, all on one legal research platform,
Speaker 1: including guidance analysis and Bloomberg Market Intelligence. Find out more
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg Law dot com. Now another legal news Let's
Speaker 1: take a look at a case claiming President Trump is
Speaker 1: violating the Constitutions for an Emoluments Clause, a rarely invoked
Speaker 1: provision that bars federal office holders from taking gifts and
Speaker 1: payments from other governments. For more on this story, Bloomberg, Lahos,
Speaker 1: Jing Grosso, and Greg Sture speak with Richard Painter, a
Speaker 1: former White House ethics lawyer and vice chairman of Citizens
Speaker 1: for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. That's the watchdog group
Speaker 1: responsible for the lawsuit against President Trump. One of the
Speaker 1: issues Judge Daniels asked about was basically, why is this
Speaker 1: thing in court? The Constitution says that Congress can authorize
Speaker 1: a monuments, So why isn't this something that's better off
Speaker 1: being dealt with in the political process rather than the courts. Well,
Speaker 1: the Constitution says that the anybody holding a position of
Speaker 1: trusts with the United States government may not receive a
Speaker 1: present or an a monument, in a monument being a
Speaker 1: profit or benefit from a foreign government without the consent
Speaker 1: of Congress. So a president has the option of going
Speaker 1: to Congress and asking for consent to receive profits and
Speaker 1: benefits from dealings with foreign governments, whether it's foreign diplomat
Speaker 1: staying in the hotels and running out the ball rooms,
Speaker 1: or whether it's the financial support that the Trump business
Speaker 1: empire very likely guests from banks controlled by foreign governments.
Speaker 1: We know about the Bank of China extending some substantial loans,
Speaker 1: and there may very well be others and sovereign wealth funds.
Speaker 1: So he could go to Congress for permission. But when
Speaker 1: he doesn't do that, he's in violation of the Constitution. UH.
Speaker 1: And we are asking the judge to require the President
Speaker 1: in an injunction uh to Hoi to comply with the
Speaker 1: amnuments cause, not accept profits or benefits from doings with
Speaker 1: foreign governments, or do what the Constitution says he must do,
Speaker 1: which is to go to Congress and get permission. Richard.
Speaker 1: The Trump administration is arguing that Crew and other plaintiffs
Speaker 1: lacked the legal standing to sue that they can claim
Speaker 1: the kind of injury from his alleged violation of the
Speaker 1: Monuments Clause that's needed. How do you answer that, Well,
Speaker 1: we believe we do have a standing under the standing
Speaker 1: case law in the Second Circuit UH, where we have
Speaker 1: brought the case in the Southern District of New York.
Speaker 1: We have had to developed very substantial resources to dealing
Speaker 1: with this new avenue and very dangerous avenue corruption that
Speaker 1: the founders anticipated when they drafted the Miamus Clause UH,
Speaker 1: and that is foreign governments seeking to influence the United
Speaker 1: States government officials through unconstitutional payments on profits and benefits.
Speaker 1: And so we believe we do have standing, and that's
Speaker 1: one of the issues that Judge Daniels is gonna have
Speaker 1: to the thaw. As former White House ethics lawyer Richard
Speaker 1: Painter speaking with Bloomberg student Grosso and Greg Sture. You
Speaker 1: can listen to Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm Wall
Speaker 1: Street Time here on Bloomberg Radio, and find more legal
Speaker 1: news at Bloomberg law dot com. Attorneys will find a
Speaker 1: septional legal research and business development tools there as well.
Speaker 1: Visit Bloomberg Law dot com for more information.