logo
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin

Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin

Yahooa day ago

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government.
In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month — a move made so the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One — violates the Constitution Emoluments Clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval.
'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote.
The Pentagon announced on May 21 it officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump.
The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One.
Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems.
A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval.
'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on the social platform X last month after news of the gift broke.
Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not.
Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed.
Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift, but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor.
Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves.
In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him.
Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country.
In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.'
'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet.
'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The legal issues raised by Trump sending the National Guard to L.A.
The legal issues raised by Trump sending the National Guard to L.A.

Los Angeles Times

time26 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

The legal issues raised by Trump sending the National Guard to L.A.

The Trump administration announced Saturday that National Guard troops were being sent to Los Angeles — an action Gov. Gavin Newsom said he opposed. President Trump is activating the Guard by using powers that have been invoked only rarely. Trump said in a memo to the Defense and Homeland Security departments that he was calling the National Guard into federal service under a provision called Title 10 to 'temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions.' Title 10 provides for activating National Guard troops for federal service. Such Title 10 orders can be used for deploying National Guard members in the United States or abroad. Erwin Chemerinsky, one of the nation's leading constitutional law scholars, said 'for the federal government to take over the California National Guard, without the request of the governor, to put down protests is truly chilling.' 'It is using the military domestically to stop dissent,' said Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law. 'It certainly sends a message as to how this administration is going to respond to protests. It is very frightening to see this done.' Tom Homan, the Trump administration's 'border czar,' announced the plan to send the National Guard in an interview on Fox News on Saturday as protesters continued confronting immigration agents during raids. 'This is about enforcing the law,' Homan said. 'We're not going to apologize for doing it. We're stepping up.' 'We're already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing,' he added. 'We're gonna bring the National Guard in tonight. We're gonna continue doing our job. We're gonna push back on these people.' Newsom criticized the federal action, saying that local law enforcement was already mobilized and that sending in troops was a move that was 'purposefully inflammatory' and would 'only escalate tensions.' The governor called the president and they spoke for about 40 minutes, according to the governor's office. Critics have raised concerns that Trump also might try to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to activate troops as part of his campaign to deport large numbers of undocumented immigrants. The president has the authority under the Insurrection Act to federalize the National Guard units of states to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' that 'so hinders the execution of the laws' that any portion of the state's inhabitants are deprived of a constitutional right and state authorities are unable or unwilling to protect that right. The American Civil Liberties Union has warned that Trump's use of the military domestically would be misguided and dangerous. According to the ACLU, Title 10 activation of National Guard troops has historically been rare and Congress has prohibited troops deployed under the law from providing 'direct assistance' to civilian law enforcement — under both a separate provision of Title 10 as well as the Posse Comitatus Act. The Insurrection Act, however, is viewed as an exception to the prohibitions under the Posse Comitatus Act. In 1958, President Eisenhower invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy troops to Arkansas to enforce the Supreme Court's decision ending racial segregation in schools, and to defend Black students against a violent mob. Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU's National Security Project, wrote in a recent article that if Trump were to invoke the Insurrection Act 'to activate federalized troops for mass deportation — whether at the border or somewhere else in the country — it would be unprecedented, unnecessary, and wrong.' Chemerinsky said invoking the Insurrection Act and nationalizing a state's National Guard has been reserved for extreme circumstances where there are no other alternatives to maintain the peace. Chemerinsky said he feared that in this case the Trump administration was seeking 'to send a message to protesters of the willingness of the federal government to use federal troops to quell protests.' In 1992, California Gov. Pete Wilson requested that President George H.W. Bush use the National Guard to quell the unrest in Los Angeles after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. That was under a different provision of federal law that allows the president to use military force in the United States. That provision applies if a state governor or legislature requests it. California politics editor Phil Willon contributed to this report.

Trump attends UFC championship fight in NJ, taking a break from politics, Musk feud

time30 minutes ago

Trump attends UFC championship fight in NJ, taking a break from politics, Musk feud

NEWARK, N.J. -- President Donald Trump walked out to a thunderous standing ovation just ahead of the start of the UFC pay-per-view card at the Prudential Center on Saturday night, putting his public feud with tech billionaire Elon Musk on hold to instead watch the fierce battles inside the cage. Trump was accompanied by UFC President Dana White and the pair headed to their cageside seats to Kid Rock's 'American Bad Ass.' Trump and White did the same for UFC's card last November at Madison Square Garden, only then they were joined by Musk. Trump shook hands with fans and supporters — a heavyweight lineup that included retired boxing champion Mike Tyson — on his way to the cage. Trump was joined by his daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, along with son Eric Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Trump shook hands with the UFC broadcast team that included Joe Rogan. Rogan hosted Trump on his podcast for hours in the final stages of the campaign last year. UFC fans went wild for Trump and held mobile devices in their outstretched arms to snap pictures of him. Trump arrived in time for the start of a card set to include two championship fights. Julianna Peña and Merab Dvalishvili were scheduled to each defend their 135-pound championships. UFC fighter Kevin Holland won the first fight with Trump in the building, scaled the cage and briefly chatted with the President before his post-fight interview.

Gina Ortiz Jones, a Progressive, Is Elected San Antonio's Mayor
Gina Ortiz Jones, a Progressive, Is Elected San Antonio's Mayor

New York Times

time30 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Gina Ortiz Jones, a Progressive, Is Elected San Antonio's Mayor

Gina Ortiz Jones, a Filipino American who served as under secretary of the Air Force during the Biden administration, won a runoff election on Saturday to become the mayor of San Antonio, making her the first openly gay leader of the seventh-largest city in the country. Ms. Jones, 44, defeated Rolando Pablos, 57, a Mexican immigrant and former Texas secretary of state known for his close ties to Gov. Greg Abbott, a conservative Republican. 'San Antonio showed up and showed out,' Ms. Jones told a group of supporters Saturday night, and then referring to voters she added. 'We reminded them that our city is about compassion and it's about leading with everybody in mind.' 'So I look forward to being a mayor for all.' The election was a test of Latino sentiment after the dramatic shift of Hispanic voters toward Donald J. Trump in 2024. Kamala Harris handily won San Antonio, a Latino-majority city and Democratic stronghold, but Mr. Trump made significant gains in the city on his way to a 14-percentage-point victory in Texas. On Saturday night, Mr. Pablos conceded. 'We tried. It was a very tough race.' Though technically nonpartisan, Mr. Pablos did not downplay his ties to Republican leaders in Texas, nor did Ms. Jones shy from her longstanding Democratic connections. Heading into Saturday, she was seen as the front-runner, having earned the largest portion of the voting bloc in a crowded, 27-candidate election in May. Then, she won 27 percent of the vote to Mr. Pablos's 17 percent. She was also closely aligned with the politics of the outgoing mayor, Ron Nirenberg, who was first elected in 2017 and is term limited after four consecutive wins. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store