WEBVTT - MD, DC Attorneys General Bring Suits Against Trump (Audio)

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.440
<v Speaker 1>Since President Trump took office, there's been a lot of

0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:05.800
<v Speaker 1>talk about a clause in the Constitution most Americans had

0:00:05.840 --> 0:00:09.280
<v Speaker 1>never heard of before, the emoluments Clause. Now the State

0:00:09.280 --> 0:00:12.680
<v Speaker 1>of Maryland and Washington d c. Are suing Trump, alleging

0:00:12.720 --> 0:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>he violated the Foreign and domestic emoluments clauses of the Constitution.

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:22.000
<v Speaker 1>Here's District of Columbia Attorney General Carl Rassin Racine. Never

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.759
<v Speaker 1>in the history of this country have we had a

0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:30.000
<v Speaker 1>president with these kinds of extensive business entanglements, or president

0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:35.800
<v Speaker 1>who refused to adequately distanced themselves from their holdings. But

0:00:35.920 --> 0:00:39.240
<v Speaker 1>the Justice Department has argued the Foreign Emoluments Clause doesn't

0:00:39.240 --> 0:00:43.839
<v Speaker 1>apply to Trump's fair market commercial transactions. I've been talking

0:00:43.880 --> 0:00:47.199
<v Speaker 1>to Jed Sugarman, a professor at Fordham Law School. Jed

0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:52.360
<v Speaker 1>start by describing the Foreign Emoluments Clause in simple, easy

0:00:52.360 --> 0:00:55.640
<v Speaker 1>to understand terms. Sure, I mean, I can just read.

0:00:55.680 --> 0:00:58.920
<v Speaker 1>Each one is a sentence. So the Foreign Emoluments Clause says,

0:00:58.960 --> 0:01:02.360
<v Speaker 1>no person holding any office of profit or trust under

0:01:02.400 --> 0:01:06.360
<v Speaker 1>them shall with that without the consent of Congress, except

0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:11.200
<v Speaker 1>any present a molument, office, or title of any kind whatever,

0:01:11.720 --> 0:01:14.640
<v Speaker 1>from any King, prince, or foreign state. So there's the

0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:18.080
<v Speaker 1>word amolument and of any kind whatever, um. And then

0:01:18.080 --> 0:01:21.160
<v Speaker 1>the domestic amoluments clause, and that's the even even most

0:01:21.200 --> 0:01:24.080
<v Speaker 1>important one here in these cases. Um, this is about

0:01:24.120 --> 0:01:27.200
<v Speaker 1>the president. The president shall not receive any amolument from

0:01:27.240 --> 0:01:29.840
<v Speaker 1>the United States or from any of them. So that's

0:01:29.920 --> 0:01:33.080
<v Speaker 1>federal or state. So the question always is what's an

0:01:33.080 --> 0:01:35.560
<v Speaker 1>a molument. It's not a word we ever use now

0:01:35.600 --> 0:01:37.880
<v Speaker 1>in the twenty one century, but they used it a

0:01:37.920 --> 0:01:40.759
<v Speaker 1>lot in the eighteenth century. And the work that I've

0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:44.039
<v Speaker 1>been doing with other historians is to understand what that

0:01:44.080 --> 0:01:47.400
<v Speaker 1>word meant. We found that it is a was used

0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:50.920
<v Speaker 1>very broadly for all kinds of business benefits, not just

0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:54.920
<v Speaker 1>for salaries for an office. Um. The Trump defenders want

0:01:54.960 --> 0:01:57.920
<v Speaker 1>to argue, and it's historically inaccurate that this word was

0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:01.000
<v Speaker 1>meant narrowly. Um. It is clear from all of the

0:02:01.040 --> 0:02:03.240
<v Speaker 1>sources at the time of the founding that it was

0:02:03.360 --> 0:02:07.280
<v Speaker 1>generally used for all kinds of benefits and private transactions.

0:02:07.360 --> 0:02:11.240
<v Speaker 1>So well. Presidents are on subject to ethics laws that

0:02:11.320 --> 0:02:14.840
<v Speaker 1>apply to other federal office holders. Most lawyers agree that

0:02:15.000 --> 0:02:19.800
<v Speaker 1>the foreign emoluments clause does apply to presidents now tell us.

0:02:19.880 --> 0:02:23.080
<v Speaker 1>What the case is, what we know he has an

0:02:23.120 --> 0:02:28.000
<v Speaker 1>extensive financial network. What are the state of Maryland and

0:02:28.080 --> 0:02:33.399
<v Speaker 1>Washington d C alleging, Well, it's it's a couple of allegations, um.

0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:36.320
<v Speaker 1>And that's that's the problem is that when Trump is

0:02:36.400 --> 0:02:40.919
<v Speaker 1>using his businesses, it's a direct way for foreign entities

0:02:41.080 --> 0:02:43.760
<v Speaker 1>like Saudi Arabia. We've seen lots of evidence of how

0:02:43.960 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 1>the Saudis have you have paid about three hundred thousand

0:02:46.720 --> 0:02:50.320
<v Speaker 1>dollars to through the d C hotel um. And so

0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:53.960
<v Speaker 1>the that's one problem. And then the domestic emoluments problem

0:02:54.040 --> 0:02:56.960
<v Speaker 1>is all kinds of states are paying millions of dollars

0:02:57.000 --> 0:03:00.760
<v Speaker 1>per UH per year to Trump through his organ zations.

0:03:00.800 --> 0:03:03.760
<v Speaker 1>So the concern for for Maryland and for Washington d

0:03:03.840 --> 0:03:07.760
<v Speaker 1>C is that not only are their citizens being disadvantaged

0:03:07.760 --> 0:03:10.560
<v Speaker 1>by Trump using his office to attract business. That creates

0:03:10.560 --> 0:03:14.680
<v Speaker 1>a competitive disadvantage on fair disadvantage for their citizens, but

0:03:14.720 --> 0:03:17.160
<v Speaker 1>it also weakens the states. If you have we know

0:03:17.240 --> 0:03:20.720
<v Speaker 1>that California's pension UH in New York's pension, Texas is

0:03:20.800 --> 0:03:23.560
<v Speaker 1>using its pension to send millions of dollars to Trump.

0:03:23.880 --> 0:03:27.520
<v Speaker 1>That disadvantages the states with regard to each other, and

0:03:27.560 --> 0:03:30.160
<v Speaker 1>you have foreign countries who are getting an advantage over

0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:33.760
<v Speaker 1>not only citizens but also states in being able to

0:03:33.800 --> 0:03:37.560
<v Speaker 1>exercise control and influence. So the other key point here

0:03:37.600 --> 0:03:41.240
<v Speaker 1>is that Supreme Court precedent establishes that the states have

0:03:41.280 --> 0:03:44.440
<v Speaker 1>a special role, that they've called it a special solicitude

0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:47.680
<v Speaker 1>um in our federal system, and that they need to

0:03:47.720 --> 0:03:50.640
<v Speaker 1>have the power to get into court to be able

0:03:50.680 --> 0:03:54.960
<v Speaker 1>to protect themselves. And so under that those precedents, one

0:03:55.040 --> 0:03:58.320
<v Speaker 1>is called Massachusetts first as e p A that establishes

0:03:58.520 --> 0:04:01.720
<v Speaker 1>that these states can get in a court and defend themselves.

0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:06.040
<v Speaker 1>So jed this is the second lawsuit over basically the

0:04:06.080 --> 0:04:10.440
<v Speaker 1>same issue. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington already filed.

0:04:10.520 --> 0:04:15.080
<v Speaker 1>So what has the Justice Department's response been. So they

0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:18.960
<v Speaker 1>just filed their response UM their brief to um support

0:04:19.000 --> 0:04:22.680
<v Speaker 1>their motion to dismiss on Friday UM. And it's the

0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:25.880
<v Speaker 1>the argument they make is very weak. UM. The problem

0:04:26.000 --> 0:04:29.719
<v Speaker 1>is uh that there they the Department of Justice is

0:04:29.800 --> 0:04:32.960
<v Speaker 1>arguing that Trump can accept any payment at all the

0:04:33.480 --> 0:04:35.920
<v Speaker 1>because the corporate that the Trump corporations are separate from

0:04:35.960 --> 0:04:39.240
<v Speaker 1>Trump the person, and so the corporations any money the

0:04:39.240 --> 0:04:42.840
<v Speaker 1>corporations take in is llegally separate from the president UM,

0:04:42.880 --> 0:04:47.320
<v Speaker 1>and that that's a misinterpretation of established law. UM. The

0:04:47.440 --> 0:04:49.679
<v Speaker 1>monuments are about a benefit. And the way that President

0:04:49.680 --> 0:04:53.200
<v Speaker 1>Trump has set up his his organization is that he

0:04:53.680 --> 0:04:56.440
<v Speaker 1>this trust is not a blind trust. He can take

0:04:56.480 --> 0:04:59.720
<v Speaker 1>profits anytime he wants. He can disband the trust or

0:04:59.760 --> 0:05:03.080
<v Speaker 1>of Okay at any time, UM, and he's the sole beneficiary.

0:05:03.160 --> 0:05:06.160
<v Speaker 1>So it's clear that any payment that comes from California,

0:05:06.279 --> 0:05:08.640
<v Speaker 1>or that comes from Saudi Arabia or from other countries

0:05:09.000 --> 0:05:11.800
<v Speaker 1>is a benefit directly to President Trump. And that's what

0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:16.080
<v Speaker 1>the emolument's clause was meant to address. In about twenty seconds.

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:20.720
<v Speaker 1>What's the solution if if they win this case, what happens? Well,

0:05:20.720 --> 0:05:23.040
<v Speaker 1>I think that I think the easiest solution for Trump

0:05:23.120 --> 0:05:26.919
<v Speaker 1>is actually quite easy. If he just UM put the

0:05:27.000 --> 0:05:30.320
<v Speaker 1>company into a blind trust or completely handed it over

0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:33.119
<v Speaker 1>and separated from himself, that would be simple. It's it's

0:05:33.120 --> 0:05:37.440
<v Speaker 1>actually quite amazing that he is enduring this unforced error

0:05:37.680 --> 0:05:39.960
<v Speaker 1>UM in this controversy. It just shows I think how

0:05:40.000 --> 0:05:42.600
<v Speaker 1>committed he is uh to being able to use these

0:05:42.640 --> 0:05:45.760
<v Speaker 1>corporations for his personal benefit. We will see if that

0:05:45.839 --> 0:05:49.360
<v Speaker 1>ever happens. Thank you, Jed Sugarman, Professor at Fordham Law School,