Latest news with #emoluments
New York Times
3 days ago
- Business
- New York Times
Top Democrat Warns Hegseth He Could Face Fines for Accepting Qatari Plane
Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, informed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday that he could face steep fines for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government, arguing the gift violated the Constitution and a federal gifts law, and required congressional approval. Mr. Hegseth was the official who formally accepted a Boeing 747 jetliner from Qatar last month, according to a Defense Department spokesman. The Pentagon has directed the Air Force to upgrade its security measures so that President Trump can use the plane as a new Air Force One. The gift has raised a host of concerns among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Some have focused on national security risks, saying they worry the plane might have listening devices, or that Mr. Trump's desire for a new plane before he leaves office might rush any security upgrade and lead corners to be cut on critical protection systems. But many lawmakers, especially Democrats such as Mr. Raskin, have focused on the ethical issues raised by a lavish gift to an American president from a foreign government. They have accused Mr. Trump of corruption and expressed fears that Qatar may be trying to improperly influence the Trump administration. In a letter on Wednesday, Mr. Raskin, a former professor of constitutional law, warned Mr. Hegseth that his acceptance of the plane violated the Constitution's emoluments clause, which bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without Congress's approval. Congress has not yet taken any formal vote to accept the plane as a gift from Qatar. Officials in the Trump administration have said that the gift is to the U.S. government, not to him as president, and therefore that it does not violate the Constitution or ethics laws. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Malay Mail
16-05-2025
- Business
- Malay Mail
Can Trump legally accept a RM1.7b jet from Qatar? What the US Constitution says about foreign gifts
WASHINGTON, May 17 — US President Donald Trump's plan to accept a US$400 million (RM1.7 billion) aeroplane from Qatar raises a raft of questions about the scope of laws that relate to gifts from foreign governments and are intended to thwart corruption and improper influence, legal experts said. Below is a look at some of the laws and legal precedents: What does the US Constitution say? There are two provisions in the US Constitution that place restrictions on the president receiving an emolument, or gift, from foreign governments or from federal or state governments. One provision states that the US Congress must approve any gift from a 'King, Prince, or foreign State' to an elected official in the United States. The other, referred to as the 'domestic' emoluments clause, prohibits the president from receiving a gift beyond salary for the job. Congress has expressly approved gifts from foreign governments in the past. In 1877, Congress accepted the Statue of Liberty as a gift from France. The foreign emoluments clause did not bar President Barack Obama in 2009 from receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, which included US$1.4 million in cash, without congressional consent. A memo from the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel determined the prize did not violate the Constitution because the Norwegian Nobel Committee is not a 'King, Prince, or foreign State.' Obama donated the money to charity. Who can enforce the provisions? That's unclear, and the Supreme Court has not addressed the question, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service. Legal experts said members of Congress, US states and even potentially some private businesses could try to sue the president if they believe a gift violates the foreign emoluments clause, but they face challenges. US courts require plaintiffs to have legal 'standing' to bring claims, meaning they must be the proper party to bring the case, which is a threshold issue for any litigation to advance. What have US courts said about emoluments? Until Trump's first term, there had not been substantial litigation over the clauses, and even the meaning of the term 'emolument' is a matter of legal dispute. Democratic members of Congress sued Trump in 2017 after his global businesses allegedly received payments from foreign governments, including when Kuwait hosted an event at the Trump International Hotel in Washington. That case was dismissed by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which said the 215 members of Congress lacked standing to sue as an institution because they did not comprise a majority. Republicans controlled both houses of Congress at the time, as they do now. The US Supreme Court declined in October 2020 to review that ruling. Attorneys general for Maryland and the District of Columbia also jointly brought an emoluments case related to Trump's businesses during his first term. Their case was dismissed by a panel of three judges, appointed by Republican presidents, of the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, also for a lack of standing. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit determined in 2019 that restaurants and hotels in New York and Washington had standing to bring an emoluments lawsuit claiming they were harmed by Trump's competing businesses. The case was dismissed without addressing the merits when Trump left office after losing the 2020 election. Do other US laws govern foreign gifts? The Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act sets requirements for gifts and allows the president to keep any that are worth less than US$480. Gifts worth more than US$480 may be accepted on behalf of the United States, which retains ownership. Presidents are allowed to keep gifts above the threshold level if they reimburse the government for the fair market cost. Are there possible exceptions? It might be possible for the plane to be accepted by the Department of Defense under a statute that was enacted in 1990 to govern contributions to defence programmes. The law allows the Secretary of Defense to accept from individuals, foreign governments and international organisations contributions of money or property and could be put to use by the Air Force, which operates the president's plane. Trump has said the plane would eventually be donated to his presidential library, a repository housing research materials from his administration. He said he has no plans to keep it for personal use after leaving office. It is unclear if such a donation would run afoul of the domestic emoluments clause, which prevents a president from accepting gifts beyond the salary for the job. — Reuters
Associated Press
12-05-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
What is the Emoluments Clause? And how might it apply to Qatar giving Trump a plane?
President Donald Trump 's readiness to accept a luxury jet as a gift from the ruling family of Qatar for conversion into a presidential aircraft has revived the conversations around emoluments and the notion of a president otherwise allegedly profiting off of the office. 'I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer,' he told reporters on Monday, after being asked if Qatar was getting anything in return for the plane. 'I could be a stupid person and say, 'no, we don't want a free, very expensive airplane.'' But there are constitutional prohibitions against the president receiving gifts from foreign entities or even domestic ones. It's a conversation over emoluments, territory that Trump has been forced to navigate, and litigate, in the past. What is an emolument? Simply, an emolument is compensation for services, from employment or holding office, that can take the form of a salary, fee or profit. What is the Emoluments Clause? There are separate emoluments delineations in the U.S. Constitution. Both are aimed at preserving the independence of the president from influence from outside entities, including Congress, states and foreign governments. Article I bars anyone holding government office from accepting any present, emolument, office or title from any 'King, Prince, or foreign State,' without congressional consent. Article II deals with domestic emoluments, noting that Congress can't increase or decrease the president's compensation during his term in office, and prohibits the president from receiving any emolument from the states. Why is the Emoluments Clause coming up now? Trump has reportedly been offered a Boeing 747-8 by Qatar in an arrangement that could be formalized as he travels to the Middle East this week. The Qatari government has said a final decision hasn't been made. But Trump has defended the idea as a fiscally smart move for the country, even as critics argue it would amount to a president accepting an astonishingly valuable gift from a foreign government. 'If we can get a 747 as a contribution to our Defense Department to use during a couple of years while they're building the other ones, I think that was a very nice gesture,' Trump said Monday at the White House. The luxury 747 — currently parked at Palm Beach International Airport, close to Trump's private Mar-a-Lago resort — would be donated to a future presidential library. Trump has said that he wouldn't use it for personal travel after leaving office, suggesting that it would be decommissioned like the Boeing 707 that Ronald Reagan flew on in the 1980s, and which is currently on display at Reagan's presidential library in Simi Valley, California. There are other Trump-related deals with Qatar. Last month, the Trump family company struck a deal to build a luxury golf resort there, in a sign it has no plans to hold back from foreign dealmaking during a second Trump administration. The project, which features Trump-branded beachside villas and an 18-hole golf course to be built by a Saudi Arabian company, marked the first foreign deal by the Trump Organization since Trump resumed office. Has Trump dealt with debate over emoluments before? In his first term, Trump faced lawsuits from Maryland and the District of Columbia, as well as high-end restaurants and hotels in New York and Washington, D.C., that accused him of illegally profiting off the presidency through his luxury Washington hotel. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court brought an end to the cases, ruling them as moot since Trump was no longer president. The justices threw out Trump's challenge to lower court rulings that had allowed lawsuits to go forward alleging that he violated the Constitution's emoluments clause by accepting payments from foreign and domestic officials who stay at the Trump International Hotel and patronize other businesses owned by the former president and his family. Has Congress weighed in on emoluments? They've tried. Last year, congressional Democrats introduced legislation that would prohibit U.S. officials from accepting money, payments or gifts from foreign governments without congressional consent. It was their response to a yearslong probe into Trump's overseas business dealings. The proposals led by Rep. Jamie Raskin and Sen. Richard Blumenthal would enforce the Constitution's ban on emoluments, which prohibits the president from accepting foreign gifts and money without Congress' permission. Democrats have argued that Trump ignored the clause as president. Both bills did not advance. ___ Kinnard reported from Chapin, South Carolina, and can be reached at
Washington Post
11-05-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
Qatar's gift to Trump reveals a loophole big enough to fly a jumbo jet through
Jacob T. Levy is Tomlinson professor of political theory and coordinator of the Research Group on Constitutional Studies at McGill University, and a senior fellow at the Niskanen Center. During his first term, Donald Trump tested the boundaries of presidential financial ethics. Most notably, foreign governments spent lavishly at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, raising questions about the constitutional prohibition on public officials receiving 'presents' or 'emoluments' from any foreign state. What would that mean in the context of foreign governments and their lobbyists acting as customers of an ongoing business owned by the official? Who, if anyone, has the authority to do anything about it?
