1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,920
Speaker 1: Now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief, exploring

2
00:00:03,040 --> 00:00:05,280
Speaker 1: legal issues in the news and the labrary, brought to

3
00:00:05,320 --> 00:00:09,880
Speaker 1: you by American Arbitration Association. Business disputes are inevitable, resolve

4
00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:13,640
Speaker 1: faster with the American Arbitration Association, the global leader in

5
00:00:13,720 --> 00:00:17,400
Speaker 1: alternative dispute resolution for over ninety years. More at a

6
00:00:17,520 --> 00:00:21,200
Speaker 1: dr dot Org, Bloomberg Law host Doing Grosso and Greg

7
00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:25,120
Speaker 1: Sture discuss an ethics lawsuit brought against President Donald Trump

8
00:00:25,120 --> 00:00:29,480
Speaker 1: which accuses him of violating the emoluments clause of the U. S. Constitution.

9
00:00:30,120 --> 00:00:33,640
Speaker 1: They speak with Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western University,

10
00:00:33,720 --> 00:00:39,440
Speaker 1: and Caroline Frederickson, president of the American Constitution Society. Caroline

11
00:00:39,680 --> 00:00:43,240
Speaker 1: make the case for this this lawsuit. What's the argument

12
00:00:43,280 --> 00:00:46,840
Speaker 1: that says that Trump is violating the emolument I mean,

13
00:00:46,880 --> 00:00:50,160
Speaker 1: first of all, he's conflating several things when he says

14
00:00:50,200 --> 00:00:53,960
Speaker 1: the president UH has no no conflict of interest. Um.

15
00:00:54,000 --> 00:00:57,560
Speaker 1: You know, there are many statutes, UH and lots of

16
00:00:57,600 --> 00:01:01,600
Speaker 1: custom about how president are supposed to behave to make

17
00:01:01,640 --> 00:01:05,440
Speaker 1: the American people believe that they have our nation's interests first,

18
00:01:06,000 --> 00:01:10,280
Speaker 1: not their own pocketbook. Um. But this is the Constitution. Um.

19
00:01:10,319 --> 00:01:13,959
Speaker 1: And we we're talking about is the emoluments Clause UM,

20
00:01:14,040 --> 00:01:19,039
Speaker 1: which was adopted by the Framers because of great concern

21
00:01:19,080 --> 00:01:22,520
Speaker 1: about foreign governments being able to influence those who run

22
00:01:22,520 --> 00:01:27,280
Speaker 1: our country, and by definition, to influence the president. Um.

23
00:01:27,319 --> 00:01:30,399
Speaker 1: It's it's very squarely on point. It says that no

24
00:01:30,560 --> 00:01:34,720
Speaker 1: person holding any office of profit or trust shall, without

25
00:01:34,720 --> 00:01:39,240
Speaker 1: the consent of Congress, except any president emolument, office, or

26
00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:42,840
Speaker 1: title of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or

27
00:01:42,840 --> 00:01:46,280
Speaker 1: foreign state. So you know, I think, um, you know,

28
00:01:46,360 --> 00:01:49,880
Speaker 1: it's clear that the president is covered by the emoluments clause. UM.

29
00:01:49,920 --> 00:01:52,440
Speaker 1: And I think, um, the advocates who brought this suit

30
00:01:52,520 --> 00:01:56,120
Speaker 1: have a very very strong argument, UM that there is

31
00:01:56,120 --> 00:02:00,840
Speaker 1: a potential, certainly for a violation. Jonathan, Is there a

32
00:02:00,960 --> 00:02:05,280
Speaker 1: substantive argument that the president is in violation of the Constitution?

33
00:02:05,440 --> 00:02:07,920
Speaker 1: There is an argument, And I do think there is

34
00:02:08,120 --> 00:02:12,520
Speaker 1: serious academic debate over whether the president is properly covered

35
00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:15,760
Speaker 1: by the clause. And and there is certainly academic debate

36
00:02:15,800 --> 00:02:20,160
Speaker 1: about how we identify the difference between money obtained in

37
00:02:20,240 --> 00:02:24,200
Speaker 1: a on funk transaction and what is actually an emolument

38
00:02:24,320 --> 00:02:28,120
Speaker 1: or an improper inducement. But The larger question is really

39
00:02:28,160 --> 00:02:30,600
Speaker 1: whether or not this is the sort of thing that

40
00:02:30,880 --> 00:02:33,760
Speaker 1: should be handled in the federal courts. The emoluments cause

41
00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:37,360
Speaker 1: itself gives Congress the authority to decide what the line

42
00:02:37,400 --> 00:02:41,240
Speaker 1: is between the permissible and impermissible emolument uh. The impeachment

43
00:02:41,280 --> 00:02:46,040
Speaker 1: Clause specifically identifies bribery as a potential grounds for impeachment.

44
00:02:46,320 --> 00:02:48,200
Speaker 1: So I think the larger question is whether or not

45
00:02:48,600 --> 00:02:50,520
Speaker 1: this is the sort of thing that the political process

46
00:02:50,520 --> 00:02:52,600
Speaker 1: should deal with or the sort of thing that should

47
00:02:52,600 --> 00:02:55,440
Speaker 1: be left in the hands of, you know, a single

48
00:02:55,440 --> 00:02:58,480
Speaker 1: federal judge in a single court case. As Jonathan Adler,

49
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:01,760
Speaker 1: a professor at Case Western Need Versity, and Caroline Frederickson,

50
00:03:01,800 --> 00:03:05,720
Speaker 1: president of the American Constitution Society, speaking with Bloomberg Laho

51
00:03:05,760 --> 00:03:08,520
Speaker 1: Stoom Grasso and Greg Sture. You can listen to Bloomberg

52
00:03:08,600 --> 00:03:11,200
Speaker 1: Law weekdays at one pm Wall Street Time here on

53
00:03:11,240 --> 00:03:14,280
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio, and that's this morning's Bloomberg Law Brief. You

54
00:03:14,320 --> 00:03:16,920
Speaker 1: can find more legal news at Bloomberg Law dot com

55
00:03:17,000 --> 00:03:20,560
Speaker 1: and Bloomberg b NA dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional

56
00:03:20,639 --> 00:03:23,600
Speaker 1: legal research and business development tools there as well. Visit

57
00:03:23,600 --> 00:03:26,440
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg b NA dot com

58
00:03:26,560 --> 00:03:27,639
Speaker 1: for more information,