1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,960
Speaker 1: It's surprising to students of the law that the average

2
00:00:03,000 --> 00:00:06,760
Speaker 1: well informed American now knows about a clause in Article one,

3
00:00:06,840 --> 00:00:11,040
Speaker 1: Section four of the Constitution, the Emoluments Clause, thanks to

4
00:00:11,200 --> 00:00:15,760
Speaker 1: businessman President Donald Trump. The clause prohibits federal officials, certainly

5
00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:18,680
Speaker 1: the president, from accepting anything of value from a foreign

6
00:00:18,720 --> 00:00:22,400
Speaker 1: government without the consent of Congress. Talk about whether Trump

7
00:00:22,480 --> 00:00:26,320
Speaker 1: is violating the emoluments Clause by accepting payments from foreign

8
00:00:26,320 --> 00:00:30,040
Speaker 1: governments through his business empire turned into a federal lawsuit

9
00:00:30,120 --> 00:00:34,040
Speaker 1: by a DC based watchdog group in January. That lawsuit

10
00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:36,760
Speaker 1: has been strengthened by the addition of two new plaintiffs,

11
00:00:36,880 --> 00:00:40,400
Speaker 1: an association of restaurants and restaurant workers and a woman

12
00:00:40,400 --> 00:00:44,200
Speaker 1: who books banquet halls for two DC hotels. Our guest

13
00:00:44,280 --> 00:00:46,680
Speaker 1: is Richard Painter. He's a professor at the University of

14
00:00:46,720 --> 00:00:50,320
Speaker 1: Minnesota Law School and a former White House ethics lawyer.

15
00:00:51,040 --> 00:00:54,600
Speaker 1: Richard does the addition of the new plaintiffs help get

16
00:00:54,640 --> 00:00:58,160
Speaker 1: over the hurdle of standing to file the lawsuit, which

17
00:00:58,240 --> 00:01:04,559
Speaker 1: is the legal requirement that the plaintive actually suffered actual harm. Well,

18
00:01:05,319 --> 00:01:08,240
Speaker 1: I believe that we had standing to begin with, as

19
00:01:08,040 --> 00:01:13,400
Speaker 1: the citizens for responsibility and ethnics in Washington Crew because

20
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:16,679
Speaker 1: we as a nonprofit organization, worked for many years to

21
00:01:16,760 --> 00:01:19,880
Speaker 1: address conflicts of interests and ethics problems in government and

22
00:01:19,880 --> 00:01:24,240
Speaker 1: now have to devote substantial resources to addressing this problem

23
00:01:24,280 --> 00:01:29,759
Speaker 1: of the monuments or foreign government payoffs uh to the president. UH.

24
00:01:29,800 --> 00:01:32,840
Speaker 1: So I believe we had a very strong standing argument.

25
00:01:33,200 --> 00:01:37,560
Speaker 1: But these other plaintiffs have different standing arguments of economic

26
00:01:37,600 --> 00:01:41,840
Speaker 1: harms to their business or to their employment from the

27
00:01:41,840 --> 00:01:46,680
Speaker 1: president's receipt of business from foreign governments at his hotels,

28
00:01:46,720 --> 00:01:50,000
Speaker 1: and so we welcome them to the to the lawsuit. Uh.

29
00:01:50,040 --> 00:01:53,480
Speaker 1: And we're all arguing the same uh thing with the

30
00:01:53,480 --> 00:01:56,480
Speaker 1: respect of the underlying violation of the Constitution, which is

31
00:01:56,520 --> 00:02:00,400
Speaker 1: the receipt of foreign government of payments and benefits by

32
00:02:00,440 --> 00:02:05,520
Speaker 1: the President's businesses, which is specifically prohibited under the Constitution

33
00:02:05,560 --> 00:02:09,800
Speaker 1: because the founders did not want our government officials um

34
00:02:09,960 --> 00:02:13,880
Speaker 1: uh doing business and in fact with foreign governments there's

35
00:02:13,960 --> 00:02:16,760
Speaker 1: just too much run for conflict of interest there, and

36
00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:20,359
Speaker 1: that's why it's prohibited at the Constitution. Richard, what is it,

37
00:02:20,760 --> 00:02:23,799
Speaker 1: uh that hard to get a direct competitor of the

38
00:02:24,120 --> 00:02:26,679
Speaker 1: Trump hotel aboard as a plaintiffs so this is a

39
00:02:26,960 --> 00:02:29,680
Speaker 1: is an association of restaurants and restaurant workers, and a

40
00:02:29,680 --> 00:02:32,200
Speaker 1: woman who books banquet halls. It would seem like the

41
00:02:32,240 --> 00:02:34,800
Speaker 1: clearest case for somebody who could sue would be would

42
00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:37,880
Speaker 1: be somebody who can say, you know, my business, uh,

43
00:02:37,919 --> 00:02:41,840
Speaker 1: directly competes with the hotel and we're losing customers. Well,

44
00:02:41,880 --> 00:02:46,640
Speaker 1: I think the banquet halls. Uh. Uh A question here

45
00:02:46,720 --> 00:02:51,480
Speaker 1: are competing banquet halls. Uh. The question is whether someone

46
00:02:51,560 --> 00:02:53,239
Speaker 1: wants to bring a lot of suit against the President

47
00:02:53,240 --> 00:02:56,160
Speaker 1: of United Sates, particularly a chain of hotels. That's not

48
00:02:56,639 --> 00:02:59,400
Speaker 1: all what a lot of chain hotel chains are necessarily

49
00:02:59,400 --> 00:03:02,799
Speaker 1: gonna want to do at this charcture. Uh. So you

50
00:03:02,919 --> 00:03:05,360
Speaker 1: need someone who not only has a very good spanning argument,

51
00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:10,480
Speaker 1: but who wants to bring the suit. Richard, Lots of

52
00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:14,400
Speaker 1: people in lots of organizations have been trying to get

53
00:03:14,480 --> 00:03:18,160
Speaker 1: Trump to give his tax returns to reveal them to

54
00:03:18,240 --> 00:03:21,720
Speaker 1: the public. Professor Larry Tribe, who is one of the

55
00:03:21,760 --> 00:03:24,960
Speaker 1: lawyers on the case, said he thinks the district court

56
00:03:25,000 --> 00:03:29,520
Speaker 1: will have every reason to compel disclosure of Trump's tax

57
00:03:29,560 --> 00:03:34,440
Speaker 1: returns in the lawsuit. Explain why if you agree, Well,

58
00:03:35,000 --> 00:03:37,520
Speaker 1: yes I do, and Larry tried Bisco Council with me

59
00:03:37,720 --> 00:03:40,680
Speaker 1: on that case. I am representing Crew on with Norman

60
00:03:40,800 --> 00:03:44,680
Speaker 1: Eisen who was the former chief ethic player for President Obama.

61
00:03:44,720 --> 00:03:46,920
Speaker 1: I was the former chief ethnic player for President of PLUSH.

62
00:03:47,520 --> 00:03:50,040
Speaker 1: So we're all working of four Crew representing Crew in

63
00:03:50,080 --> 00:03:53,920
Speaker 1: this lawsuit. And uh we do believe that the court

64
00:03:54,320 --> 00:03:57,720
Speaker 1: would ask for discovery, should ask for discovery that would

65
00:03:57,720 --> 00:04:03,080
Speaker 1: disclose the underlying payments made two corporations that are controlled

66
00:04:03,080 --> 00:04:06,360
Speaker 1: by the president. Uh, so we can see which faments

67
00:04:06,440 --> 00:04:11,320
Speaker 1: coming from foreign governments and corporations including banks controlled by

68
00:04:11,360 --> 00:04:14,960
Speaker 1: foreign governments to sovereign wealth fund. The tax returns would

69
00:04:14,960 --> 00:04:19,080
Speaker 1: disclosed at least some of that information. So whether we

70
00:04:19,160 --> 00:04:22,040
Speaker 1: get the tax returns or what we get comparable information

71
00:04:22,120 --> 00:04:25,320
Speaker 1: that's even more comprehensive than the tax returns remains to

72
00:04:25,400 --> 00:04:27,880
Speaker 1: be seen. But that's the information we believe this Judge

73
00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:34,240
Speaker 1: um should be disclosed. Uh Judge Abrams and uh we

74
00:04:34,640 --> 00:04:39,680
Speaker 1: uh we were hoping she does. Thank you. Thank you.

75
00:04:39,800 --> 00:04:42,839
Speaker 1: Richard Painter, professor at the University of Minnesota Law School,

76
00:04:42,880 --> 00:04:46,240
Speaker 1: former White House ethics lawyer and one of the lawyers

77
00:04:46,360 --> 00:04:50,440
Speaker 1: who is bringing this case for Crew, which is a

78
00:04:50,440 --> 00:04:53,599
Speaker 1: public interest organization. The plaintiffs have also beefed up that

79
00:04:53,720 --> 00:04:58,520
Speaker 1: lawsuit by adding what it calls gratuitous Chinese trademarks that

80
00:04:58,600 --> 00:05:02,000
Speaker 1: Trump has been granted UH A decade ago, Trump was

81
00:05:02,040 --> 00:05:05,719
Speaker 1: denied trademark protection in China's Trademark office and courts, but

82
00:05:05,800 --> 00:05:08,760
Speaker 1: he was granted trademark protection for a host of goods

83
00:05:08,760 --> 00:05:11,120
Speaker 1: and services after he was sworn in as president.