1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,440
Speaker 1: Since President Trump took office, there's been a lot of

2
00:00:02,480 --> 00:00:05,800
Speaker 1: talk about a clause in the Constitution most Americans had

3
00:00:05,840 --> 00:00:09,280
Speaker 1: never heard of before, the emoluments Clause. Now the State

4
00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:12,680
Speaker 1: of Maryland and Washington d c. Are suing Trump, alleging

5
00:00:12,720 --> 00:00:16,880
Speaker 1: he violated the Foreign and domestic emoluments clauses of the Constitution.

6
00:00:17,400 --> 00:00:22,000
Speaker 1: Here's District of Columbia Attorney General Carl Rassin Racine. Never

7
00:00:22,400 --> 00:00:24,759
Speaker 1: in the history of this country have we had a

8
00:00:24,840 --> 00:00:30,000
Speaker 1: president with these kinds of extensive business entanglements, or president

9
00:00:30,280 --> 00:00:35,800
Speaker 1: who refused to adequately distanced themselves from their holdings. But

10
00:00:35,920 --> 00:00:39,240
Speaker 1: the Justice Department has argued the Foreign Emoluments Clause doesn't

11
00:00:39,240 --> 00:00:43,839
Speaker 1: apply to Trump's fair market commercial transactions. I've been talking

12
00:00:43,880 --> 00:00:47,199
Speaker 1: to Jed Sugarman, a professor at Fordham Law School. Jed

13
00:00:47,400 --> 00:00:52,360
Speaker 1: start by describing the Foreign Emoluments Clause in simple, easy

14
00:00:52,360 --> 00:00:55,640
Speaker 1: to understand terms. Sure, I mean, I can just read.

15
00:00:55,680 --> 00:00:58,920
Speaker 1: Each one is a sentence. So the Foreign Emoluments Clause says,

16
00:00:58,960 --> 00:01:02,360
Speaker 1: no person holding any office of profit or trust under

17
00:01:02,400 --> 00:01:06,360
Speaker 1: them shall with that without the consent of Congress, except

18
00:01:06,480 --> 00:01:11,200
Speaker 1: any present a molument, office, or title of any kind whatever,

19
00:01:11,720 --> 00:01:14,640
Speaker 1: from any King, prince, or foreign state. So there's the

20
00:01:14,680 --> 00:01:18,080
Speaker 1: word amolument and of any kind whatever, um. And then

21
00:01:18,080 --> 00:01:21,160
Speaker 1: the domestic amoluments clause, and that's the even even most

22
00:01:21,200 --> 00:01:24,080
Speaker 1: important one here in these cases. Um, this is about

23
00:01:24,120 --> 00:01:27,200
Speaker 1: the president. The president shall not receive any amolument from

24
00:01:27,240 --> 00:01:29,840
Speaker 1: the United States or from any of them. So that's

25
00:01:29,920 --> 00:01:33,080
Speaker 1: federal or state. So the question always is what's an

26
00:01:33,080 --> 00:01:35,560
Speaker 1: a molument. It's not a word we ever use now

27
00:01:35,600 --> 00:01:37,880
Speaker 1: in the twenty one century, but they used it a

28
00:01:37,920 --> 00:01:40,759
Speaker 1: lot in the eighteenth century. And the work that I've

29
00:01:40,800 --> 00:01:44,039
Speaker 1: been doing with other historians is to understand what that

30
00:01:44,080 --> 00:01:47,400
Speaker 1: word meant. We found that it is a was used

31
00:01:47,560 --> 00:01:50,920
Speaker 1: very broadly for all kinds of business benefits, not just

32
00:01:51,160 --> 00:01:54,920
Speaker 1: for salaries for an office. Um. The Trump defenders want

33
00:01:54,960 --> 00:01:57,920
Speaker 1: to argue, and it's historically inaccurate that this word was

34
00:01:57,960 --> 00:02:01,000
Speaker 1: meant narrowly. Um. It is clear from all of the

35
00:02:01,040 --> 00:02:03,240
Speaker 1: sources at the time of the founding that it was

36
00:02:03,360 --> 00:02:07,280
Speaker 1: generally used for all kinds of benefits and private transactions.

37
00:02:07,360 --> 00:02:11,240
Speaker 1: So well. Presidents are on subject to ethics laws that

38
00:02:11,320 --> 00:02:14,840
Speaker 1: apply to other federal office holders. Most lawyers agree that

39
00:02:15,000 --> 00:02:19,800
Speaker 1: the foreign emoluments clause does apply to presidents now tell us.

40
00:02:19,880 --> 00:02:23,080
Speaker 1: What the case is, what we know he has an

41
00:02:23,120 --> 00:02:28,000
Speaker 1: extensive financial network. What are the state of Maryland and

42
00:02:28,080 --> 00:02:33,399
Speaker 1: Washington d C alleging, Well, it's it's a couple of allegations, um.

43
00:02:33,520 --> 00:02:36,320
Speaker 1: And that's that's the problem is that when Trump is

44
00:02:36,400 --> 00:02:40,919
Speaker 1: using his businesses, it's a direct way for foreign entities

45
00:02:41,080 --> 00:02:43,760
Speaker 1: like Saudi Arabia. We've seen lots of evidence of how

46
00:02:43,960 --> 00:02:46,720
Speaker 1: the Saudis have you have paid about three hundred thousand

47
00:02:46,720 --> 00:02:50,320
Speaker 1: dollars to through the d C hotel um. And so

48
00:02:50,440 --> 00:02:53,960
Speaker 1: the that's one problem. And then the domestic emoluments problem

49
00:02:54,040 --> 00:02:56,960
Speaker 1: is all kinds of states are paying millions of dollars

50
00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:00,760
Speaker 1: per UH per year to Trump through his organ zations.

51
00:03:00,800 --> 00:03:03,760
Speaker 1: So the concern for for Maryland and for Washington d

52
00:03:03,840 --> 00:03:07,760
Speaker 1: C is that not only are their citizens being disadvantaged

53
00:03:07,760 --> 00:03:10,560
Speaker 1: by Trump using his office to attract business. That creates

54
00:03:10,560 --> 00:03:14,680
Speaker 1: a competitive disadvantage on fair disadvantage for their citizens, but

55
00:03:14,720 --> 00:03:17,160
Speaker 1: it also weakens the states. If you have we know

56
00:03:17,240 --> 00:03:20,720
Speaker 1: that California's pension UH in New York's pension, Texas is

57
00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:23,560
Speaker 1: using its pension to send millions of dollars to Trump.

58
00:03:23,880 --> 00:03:27,520
Speaker 1: That disadvantages the states with regard to each other, and

59
00:03:27,560 --> 00:03:30,160
Speaker 1: you have foreign countries who are getting an advantage over

60
00:03:30,280 --> 00:03:33,760
Speaker 1: not only citizens but also states in being able to

61
00:03:33,800 --> 00:03:37,560
Speaker 1: exercise control and influence. So the other key point here

62
00:03:37,600 --> 00:03:41,240
Speaker 1: is that Supreme Court precedent establishes that the states have

63
00:03:41,280 --> 00:03:44,440
Speaker 1: a special role, that they've called it a special solicitude

64
00:03:44,760 --> 00:03:47,680
Speaker 1: um in our federal system, and that they need to

65
00:03:47,720 --> 00:03:50,640
Speaker 1: have the power to get into court to be able

66
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,960
Speaker 1: to protect themselves. And so under that those precedents, one

67
00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:58,320
Speaker 1: is called Massachusetts first as e p A that establishes

68
00:03:58,520 --> 00:04:01,720
Speaker 1: that these states can get in a court and defend themselves.

69
00:04:01,720 --> 00:04:06,040
Speaker 1: So jed this is the second lawsuit over basically the

70
00:04:06,080 --> 00:04:10,440
Speaker 1: same issue. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington already filed.

71
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:15,080
Speaker 1: So what has the Justice Department's response been. So they

72
00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:18,960
Speaker 1: just filed their response UM their brief to um support

73
00:04:19,000 --> 00:04:22,680
Speaker 1: their motion to dismiss on Friday UM. And it's the

74
00:04:22,680 --> 00:04:25,880
Speaker 1: the argument they make is very weak. UM. The problem

75
00:04:26,000 --> 00:04:29,719
Speaker 1: is uh that there they the Department of Justice is

76
00:04:29,800 --> 00:04:32,960
Speaker 1: arguing that Trump can accept any payment at all the

77
00:04:33,480 --> 00:04:35,920
Speaker 1: because the corporate that the Trump corporations are separate from

78
00:04:35,960 --> 00:04:39,240
Speaker 1: Trump the person, and so the corporations any money the

79
00:04:39,240 --> 00:04:42,840
Speaker 1: corporations take in is llegally separate from the president UM,

80
00:04:42,880 --> 00:04:47,320
Speaker 1: and that that's a misinterpretation of established law. UM. The

81
00:04:47,440 --> 00:04:49,679
Speaker 1: monuments are about a benefit. And the way that President

82
00:04:49,680 --> 00:04:53,200
Speaker 1: Trump has set up his his organization is that he

83
00:04:53,680 --> 00:04:56,440
Speaker 1: this trust is not a blind trust. He can take

84
00:04:56,480 --> 00:04:59,720
Speaker 1: profits anytime he wants. He can disband the trust or

85
00:04:59,760 --> 00:05:03,080
Speaker 1: of Okay at any time, UM, and he's the sole beneficiary.

86
00:05:03,160 --> 00:05:06,160
Speaker 1: So it's clear that any payment that comes from California,

87
00:05:06,279 --> 00:05:08,640
Speaker 1: or that comes from Saudi Arabia or from other countries

88
00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:11,800
Speaker 1: is a benefit directly to President Trump. And that's what

89
00:05:11,839 --> 00:05:16,080
Speaker 1: the emolument's clause was meant to address. In about twenty seconds.

90
00:05:16,080 --> 00:05:20,720
Speaker 1: What's the solution if if they win this case, what happens? Well,

91
00:05:20,720 --> 00:05:23,040
Speaker 1: I think that I think the easiest solution for Trump

92
00:05:23,120 --> 00:05:26,919
Speaker 1: is actually quite easy. If he just UM put the

93
00:05:27,000 --> 00:05:30,320
Speaker 1: company into a blind trust or completely handed it over

94
00:05:30,320 --> 00:05:33,119
Speaker 1: and separated from himself, that would be simple. It's it's

95
00:05:33,120 --> 00:05:37,440
Speaker 1: actually quite amazing that he is enduring this unforced error

96
00:05:37,680 --> 00:05:39,960
Speaker 1: UM in this controversy. It just shows I think how

97
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:42,600
Speaker 1: committed he is uh to being able to use these

98
00:05:42,640 --> 00:05:45,760
Speaker 1: corporations for his personal benefit. We will see if that

99
00:05:45,839 --> 00:05:49,360
Speaker 1: ever happens. Thank you, Jed Sugarman, Professor at Fordham Law School,