France gave the Statue of Liberty, Qatar offered $400M plane. Experts say it's not the same
What do the Statue of Liberty and a super luxury jumbo Boeing 747-8 have in common?Other than their proximity to clouds, not much. But in response to concerns that President Donald Trump's acceptance of a $400 million plane from Qatar could be unconstitutional, social media users began drawing parallels. Trump has said the jet would be gifted to the U.S. Air Force and used as the new Air Force One.
"I can't wait for the press to find out about France's so-called 'gift' of the Statue of Liberty, accepted in 1886 by then-President Grover Cleveland," conservative commentator Ann Coulter posted May 13 on X.
"If you don't think we should accept the Qatari 747s, should we give the Statue of Liberty back too?" another X user said.
So what's the difference between accepting Lady Liberty, gifted by the French people, and Trump accepting a plane from Qatar's monarchy?The people of France gifted the Statue of Liberty to the people of the United States, not to a government official. Congress formally accepted it and the statue remains a public monument accessible to the public.
Congress has not accepted the plane, which would be used mainly by Trump and his staff. Trump has said that after his term ends Jan. 20, 2029, the plane would be transferred to his presidential library — although it's unclear whether it would be under private or public ownership and accessible to the public.
The Statue of Liberty was not a gift to a specific government official nor the U.S. government.
"The Statue of Liberty was gifted by the French people to the American people," said Edward Berenson, professor of history and French studies at New York University and author of the book "The Statue of Liberty: A Transatlantic Story."
The statue and pedestal were both mainly funded with private donations. The French public raised money to build the statue and the American public raised money for the statue's pedestal.
Although it didn't set aside funds for it, Congress formally accepted the statue as a gift from the people of France in 1877.The statue's acceptance and erection spanned five presidencies. In 1877, President Ulysses S. Grant signed a bill designating Bedloe's Island, which is federal property, as the statue's site. Ultimately, Cleveland spoke at the statue's unveiling in 1886.
Since 1933, the National Park Service has managed the Statue of Liberty. The site is free to visit, but a ferry to the island costs money.
In the late 1800s, the statue didn't raise the same concerns we are currently seeing around the plane. "Since it wasn't a gift to the president, emoluments didn't come up, and there were no constitutional issues," Berenson said.
The Constitution's emoluments clause says, "No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
The situation with the plane is "radically different," University of Carolina Law professor Michael J. Gerhardt said. "Cleveland never took the Statue of Liberty home."
It is not unusual for presidents to receive gifts from foreign states, but gifts valued at over $480 are traditionally turned over to the National Archives. Sometimes, the gifts that presidents receive are ultimately displayed by the National Archives in a presidential library or museum, said Barbara Perry, a professor of governance and presidential expert at the University of Virginia.
Some legal experts told PolitiFact they believe accepting the plane would violate the U.S. Constitution's emoluments clause.
Trump's White House has countered that this gift is not a constitutional violation, because it is not a personal gift to the president but a gift to the U.S. Air Force.
Still, University of Missouri law professor Frank Bowman said that it doesn't mean it's not an emolument. "The gift of this particular plane, the principal enjoyment of which both during the next three and a half years… and then for the rest of his life would accrue only to Donald Trump. That's an emolument, any way you slice it, because the benefit goes to one person."
And that the plane will not remain a U.S. Air Force property, "blows the notion that this is a gift to the country completely out of the water," Bowman said.
Trump said the plane will go to his library, similar to the retired Air Force plane at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum in Simi, California. "It would go directly to the library after I leave office. I wouldn't be using it," he said on May 12.
But that parallel isn't quite the same as what Trump and Qatar have proposed. The Air Force One plane at the Reagan library was not a gift from a foreign country, but a plane that was retired in 2001 after 30 years of use.
The Reagan library does not own the plane; it remains on permanent loan from the U.S. Air Force, Melissa Giller, chief marketing officer at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute told PolitiFact via email.
Presidential libraries are typically co-managed by the National Archives and private foundations, Perry said. It is not clear which part — the private or public side — would get the airplane. If it's given to his private library foundation, Trump may have more latitude to continue to use the plane after his presidency. If it is given to the National Archives for display in the library, the government would likely be able to dictate its use.
The White House did not respond to PolitiFact questions about who would own the plane once at the library.
It is possible that the plane ultimately becomes a publicly-owned tourist attraction, like Air Force One at the Reagan Library or the Statue of Liberty, but that's not guaranteed.
Statement from White House Press Office, May 15, 2025
Email Interview with Melissa Giller, Chief Marketing Officer at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, May 14, 2025
Interview with Barbara Perry, professor of Governance at the University of Virginia, May 14, 2025
Email Interview with Edward G Berenson, Professor of History and French Studies at New York University, May 14, 2025x
Email Interview with Michael Gerhardt, law professor at the University of North Carolina, May 14, 2025
Email Interview with Richard Briffault, law professor at Columbia University, May 14, 2025
Interview with Frank Bowman, law professor at University of Missouri, May 14, 2025
PolitiFact, "Can Trump legally accept a $400 million plane from Qatar? What experts, Constitution say," May 13, 2025
Ann Coulter, "X post," (archived), May 13, 2025
X post, (archived), May 12, 2025
The Statue of Liberty, "Overview + History," accessed May 14, 2025
PBS, "A Look at Lady Liberty's First 125 Years," Oct. 28, 2011
National Park Service, "Liberty Island Chronology," May 4, 2023
State Department, "Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States with the Annual Message of the President, December 1, 1884," 1884
Miller Center, "May 11, 1886: Message on the Statue of Liberty," May 11, 1886
ABC News, "Trump administration poised to accept 'palace in the sky' as a gift for Trump from Qatar: Sources," May 11, 2025
National Park Service, "Fees & Passes - Statue Of Liberty National Monument," accessed May 15, 2025
C-SPAN, "Pres. Trump Signs Executive Order on Drug Prices," May 12, 2025
The Washington Post, "From elephants to inline skates, a history of foreign gifts to presidents," May 13. 2025
U.S. Constitution, "Foreign Emoluments Clause Generally | Constitution Annotated," accessed May 15, 2025
Karoline Leavitt, "X post," (archived), May 14, 2025
National Archives, "Presidential Libraries and Museums of the National Archives," accessed May 15, 2025
Reagan Library, "About Us," accessed May 14, 2025
National Archives, "Frequently Asked Questions," May 15, 2025
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: How the Statute of Liberty, Qatari plane gift differ
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Marjorie Taylor Greene Partially Agrees With Elon Musk on Trump-Backed Bill
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene partially backed Elon Musk Tuesday in his criticism of President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" that recently passed the House of Representatives and is under debate in the Senate. The Context The Trump-backed reconciliation package passed the House last month following weeks of negotiations in which House Speaker Mike Johnson wrangled votes from the ultraconservative and more centrist factions of the GOP. While Trump praised the measure in its current form, Senate Republicans have made it clear that they plan to make significant changes to it before it passes the upper chamber. Musk, meanwhile, has repeatedly criticized the bill, most recently calling it a "disgusting abomination," saying it was filled with "outrageous pork" that would balloon the federal deficit and undo the work by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What To Know "Congresswoman, what do you make of Elon Musk criticizing the 'One Big Beautiful Bill?'" a reporter asked Greene in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. "Well, you know, I have to agree with him on one hand," the Republican firebrand responded. "I always love it when Americans are angry at the federal government and express it. I think that should've been happening for years now. I mean, we're $36 trillion in debt for a reason." Greene, one of Trump's staunchest supporters in Congress, went on to criticize the Biden administration's initiatives on renewable energy, its handling of the economy and more. "Unfortunately, in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' we had to spend some money to right the ship and pass President Trump's campaign promises" on issues including border security and immigration enforcement, tax cuts and "America First energy." Greene is among three House Republicans who have voiced their agreement with Musk's criticisms. Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie re-shared Musk's post on X, formerly Twitter, ripping into the bill, writing, "He's right." Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio also appeared to agree, sharing another post from Musk that said, "Congress is making America bankrupt." Massie and Davidson voted against the bill in the House. Greene voted in favor of it but said she did not read through a portion of the measure related to artificial intelligence (AI) when it was initially up for vote. Greene said the provision violates states' rights, writing on X on Tuesday: "Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there." "We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous," she added. Greene said that if the Senate doesn't strip the provision from the version of the bill that's sent back to the House for final approval, she won't back it, which could complicate House GOP leadership's effort to pass the Trump-backed package. The White House responded to Musk's X posts during Tuesday's press briefing. "Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters. "This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it." What People Are Saying Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters: "We obviously respect everything that Elon did with DOGE. On this particular issue, we have a difference of opinion ... he's entitled to that opinion. We're going to proceed full speed ahead." Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said of Musk's criticisms: "He's entitled to his opinion." Asked by Politico whether Musk's criticism would affect amendments to the bill, Tillis said: "No." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer waved around a printout of Musk's post and told reporters: "I agree with Elon Musk!" What Happens Next Trump recently gave Senate Republicans a July 4 deadline to pass the bill and get it to his desk.


Associated Press
16 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Los Angeles unveils compact, athlete-friendly venue plan for 2028 Paralympics
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Every venue for the 2028 Paralympic Games in Los Angeles will be within a 35-mile radius, and athletes will be housed together, on the UCLA campus, for the first time since the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Games. LA28 announced an updated venue plan Tuesday following approval from the International Paralympic Committee's governing board. The Paralympics will run Aug. 15-27, 2028, about two weeks after the the Los Angeles Olympics end. The majority of sports will be held in Los Angeles, with the downtown and Exposition Park sites serving as the main competition hubs. The Los Angeles Convention Center will host boccia, para judo, para table tennis, para taekwondo and wheelchair fencing. Adjacent to the Convention Center, Arena will host wheelchair basketball. Across the street, Peacock Theater will host goalball in an acoustically optimized setting. The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum will host para track and field, as well as the closing ceremony. The nearby Galen Center will host wheelchair rugby and para badminton. Venice Beach on the city's westside will be the site of para triathlon and the starting point of the marathon. The Dignity Health Sports Park complex in Carson will host para archery, wheelchair tennis and para track cycling in the velodrome. Climbing will make its Paralympic debut in 2028, with four men's and four women's events in the parking lot of the Long Beach Convention Center. Para swimming will be on the same site in a temporary pool. Sport shooting will be inside the convention center at a temporary range. Long Beach Arena will host sitting volleyball. A temporary arena at Alamitos Beach along the Pacific Ocean will be the site of blind football. Para rowing and para canoe-sprint events will be held at Marine Stadium. Para equestrian events will take place at Santa Anita racetrack in Arcadia. ___ AP Olympics:


Politico
19 minutes ago
- Politico
Mexican 4-year-old allowed to continue receiving lifesaving care in US
LOS ANGELES — A 4-year-old Mexican girl who receives lifesaving medical care from a Southern California hospital was granted permission to remain in the country weeks after federal authorities said she could be deported, her family's attorneys said Tuesday. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security granted the girl and her mother humanitarian parole for one year so she can continue to receive treatment she has been getting since arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2023, according to a copy of a letter received by Rebecca Brown, an attorney for the family from the nonprofit Public Counsel. An email message was sent to the Department of Homeland Security seeking comment. The girl's family said they were notified in April and May that their humanitarian parole was being revoked and they would be subject to potential deportation. The Trump administration has been pushing to dismantle policies from former President Joe Biden's administration that granted temporary legal status for certain migrants and allowed them to live legally in the U.S., generally for two years. The girl was taken to a hospital upon arriving on at the U.S.-Mexico border with her mother in 2023 and released once she was stable enough. She receives intravenous nutrition through a special backpack for short bowel syndrome, which prevents her from being able to take in and process nutrients on her own, and lawyers said the treatment she receives is necessary at this stage for her to survive and isn't available in Mexico. The family's attorneys from Public Counsel said in a statement that while they were grateful the administration 'acted swiftly' to ensure the girl could continue her life-saving treatment, they hoped the case highlighted the need for better communication with federal immigration officials. 'We cannot ignore the systemic challenges that brought Sofia to the brink,' the attorneys said, using a pseudonym for the girl. 'Her parole was terminated without warning ... It took an international outcry and pressure from elected officials to get a response—something that used to take a single phone call.' Humanitarian parole, which doesn't put migrants on a path to U.S. citizenship, was widely used during the Biden administration to alleviate pressure on the U.S.-Mexico southern border. It was previously used on a case-by-case basis to address individual emergencies and also for people fleeing humanitarian crises around the world including Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos during the late 1970s. In Mexico, the girl was largely confined to a hospital because of her medical condition, said her mother, Deysi Vargas. After joining a program at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, she can now receive treatment at home in Bakersfield, California, and go to the park and store like other children, Vargas has said. Lawyers said the girl's medical treatment, which requires 14 hours a day of intravenous nutrition, will not be necessary indefinitely but that she is not at the point where she could live without it.