Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump speaks during the opening ceremony for the Trump International Hotel, Old Post Office, in Washington, USA on October 26, 2016.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit challenging the legality of payments to President Donald Trump's hotels by foreigners during his tenure in the White House.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit unanimously ruled that the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia do not have legal standing to sue under a claim that Trump violated the so-called emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution.

That clause, contained in Article 1 of the Constitution, bars government officeholders from accepting gifts from foreign officials.

Trump still faces a similar lawsuit in Washington federal court filed by Democratic members of Congress.

On Monday, the Justice Department urged the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss that second suit.

In its ruling, the 4th Circuit appeals panel said that Washington and Maryland's interest in enforcing that clause "is so attenuated and abstract" that it raises the question of whether their lawsuit is an appropriate use of the court system.

The suit was the first ever to claim a president violated the emoluments clause, and the appeals panel said "not only is this suit extraordinary, it also has national significance and is of special consequence."

The panel ordered a federal district court judge in Maryland to dismiss the suit against Trump with prejudice, which would bar the plaintiffs from relaunching the case.

That judge had earlier denied Trump's bids to toss out the case, which led the president to appeal his decision to the 4th Circuit.

Trump quickly crowed about the 4th Circuit's decision on Twitter.

The president's lawyer, Jay Sekulow, called the ruling "a complete victory."

The attorneys general for Washington and Maryland issued a joint statement saying they believed the appellate judges "got it wrong."

"Although the court described a litany of ways in which this case is unique, it failed to acknowledge the most extraordinary circumstance of all: President Trump is brazenly profiting from the Office of the President in ways that no other President in history ever imagined and that the founders expressly sought—in the Constitution—to prohibit," said Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine.

The two said they will "pursue our legal options," but did not name specific next steps.

They can ask the entire 4th Circuit to review the panel's ruling, or can escalate the matter to the Supreme Court, which has discretion over which cases it hears.

There is a good chance that they will ask the full court to review the decision, according to Carl Tobias, a professor of law at the University of Richmond Law School and an expert on federal judicial selection.

"I think a majority of the court is more moderate, or even liberal, compared to this panel, which is the most conservative panel you could draw of those 15 judges on this court," Tobias said. "I guess we will see something different out of the D.C. Circuit, but who knows."

The judges on the 4th Circuit panel that heard the case were Paul Niemeyer, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, Dennis Shedd, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, and Trump appointee A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. </s> This post was originally published on this site

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images(WASHINGTON) — A federal appeals court on Wednesday handed President Donald Trump a legal victory, dismissing a lawsuit accusing the president of illegally profiting from his Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., by accepting money from foreign governments.

The attorneys general from Maryland and the District of Columbia had brought the case, arguing that the president violated a constitutional clause that prohibits elected officials from doing business with foreign governments without permission from Congress.

But an appeals court panel ruled the attorneys general lacked standing to bring the lawsuit.

Reacting to the decision, President Trump tweeted, “Word just out that I won a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt.”

Earlier this year, a federal district court in Maryland had allowed the lawsuit to move forward.

But on Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals criticized the Maryland district court judge’s ruling as “so attenuated and abstract that their prosecution of this case readily provokes the question of whether this action against the President is an appropriate use of the courts.”

The appeals court decision marks the first legal victory for President Trump as his legal team fights legal challenges on several fronts.

In a statement on Wednesday, Jay Sekulow, counsel to the president, hailed the appeals court ruling as “a complete victory.”

“The decision states that there was no legal standing to bring this lawsuit in the first place,” Sekulow continued. “This latest effort at Presidential harassment has been dismissed with prejudice.“

Earlier this week, in a separate emoluments case, congressional Democrats began issuing subpoenas as part of the discovery process in their case. Justice Department attorneys representing President Trump asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene and halt the “extraordinary case,” as they called it. </s> The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday granted President Donald Trump a victory, dismissing a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia accusing the president of violating the Constitution’s emoluments clause.

At the center of the lawsuit was whether the president’s continued ownership of his businesses, including a hotel in the nation’s capital, allowed him to make money from foreign and domestic interests in violation of the Constitution.
• Emoluments Suit Vs. Trump Now Personal As Well As Official

The three-judge panel voted unanimously in Trump’s favor, saying the District and Maryland lack standing to bring the suit against the president both in his official capacity and as an individual.

The lawsuit alleged Trump was benefiting and continued to benefit from foreign governments, including Saudi Arabia, Georgia and Kuwait, holding events at the Trump International Hotel, among other properties.

As a result, the District and Maryland said facilities in which they have a public interest, including the Montgomery County Conference Center, D.C. Armory and Walter E. Washington Convention Center, were at a competitive disadvantage.

The court rejected claims that governments or groups trying to curry favor with the president would patronize his businesses, saying there was also a possibility that some officials would avoid Trump’s properties because he owned them.

“Even if government officials were patronizing the Hotel to curry the President’s favor, there is no reason to conclude that they would cease doing so were the President enjoined from receiving income from the Hotel,” the court said in its decision.

Trump claimed victory in a pair of tweets late Wednesday morning, calling the suit “ridiculous” and “a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt.”

“I don’t make money, but lose a fortune for the honor of serving and doing a great job as your President,” Trump tweeted.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh said he felt the court made the wrong decision, releasing a statement reading:

“We think that this panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals got it wrong. Although the court described a litany of ways in which this case is unique, it failed to acknowledge the most extraordinary circumstance of all: President Trump is brazenly profiting from the Office of the President in ways that no other President in history ever imagined and that the founders expressly sought—in the Constitution—to prohibit. We have not and will not abandon our efforts to hold President Trump accountable for violating the Nation’s original anti-corruption laws. We believe that the federal trial judge correctly decided that the plaintiffs have standing — and that discovery should go forward on President Trump’s receipt of emoluments. All Americans suffer when our chief executive is vulnerable to corrupt foreign influence. The idea that the District of Columbia and Maryland are not harmed by the President’s violation of the Constitution is plain error. We will continue to pursue our legal options to hold him accountable.” </s> RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal appeals court has ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of illegally profiting off the presidency.

In a significant legal victory for Trump, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday overturned a ruling by a federal judge in Maryland who said last year the lawsuit could move forward.

Maryland and the District of Columbia sued in 2017, claiming Trump has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by accepting profits through foreign and domestic officials who stay at his luxury Washington hotel.

The 4th Circuit found the two jurisdictions don’t have the standing to pursue their claims against the president.

Trump tweeted Wednesday that he had won “a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt.” </s> FILE- This March 11, 2019 file photo, shows the north entrance of the Trump International in Washington D.C. A federal appeals court has ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of illegally profiting off the presidency. In a significant legal victory for Trump, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, July 10, 2019, overturned a ruling by a federal judge in Maryland who ruled last year that the lawsuit could move forward. (AP Photo/Mark Tenally, File)

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal appeals court threw out a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of illegally profiting off the presidency through his luxury Washington hotel, handing Trump a significant legal victory Wednesday.

A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the ruling of a federal judge in Maryland who said the lawsuit could move forward.

The state of Maryland and the District of Columbia sued in 2017, claiming Trump has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by accepting profits through foreign and domestic officials who stay at the Trump International Hotel. The case is one of three that argue the president is violating the provision, which prohibits federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval.

In the case before the 4th Circuit, the court found the two jurisdictions lack standing to pursue their claims against the president, and granted a petition for a rare writ of mandamus, directing U.S. District Court Judge Peter Messitte to dismiss the lawsuit.

Trump heralded the decision in a tweet, saying, “Word just out that I won a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt.” Trump tweeted that he doesn’t make money but loses “a fortune” by serving as president.

“We are pleased that the Fourth Circuit unanimously decided to dismiss this extraordinarily flawed case,” Department of Justice spokeswoman Kelly Laco said in a statement.

During oral arguments before the panel in March, lawyers for Maryland and the District said Trump’s status as president is a driving factor for foreign and domestic government officials to stay at his hotel.

Just blocks from the White House, the iconic Old Post Office quickly became a hot spot for lobbyists and foreign officials after it reopened in October 2016 as the Trump International Hotel. A public relations firm working for Saudi Arabia spent nearly $270,000 on food and rooms. The Philippine and Kuwaiti embassies have also had parties there.

Maryland and the District claim they have suffered harm because more people would stay at hotels in their jurisdictions if they weren’t eager to curry favor with the president by staying at his hotel.

The court, however, wrote that Maryland and the District’s “interest in enforcing the Emoluments Clauses is so attenuated and abstract that their prosecution of this case readily provokes the question of whether this action against the President is an appropriate use of the courts.”

Trump’s legal team had argued that Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine — both Democrats — lack authority to sue the president in his official capacity. Trump’s lawyers also argued that the emoluments clause only bars compensation made in connection with services provided in his official capacity or in “an employment-type relationship” with a foreign or domestic government.

The 4th Circuit’s decision to hear the unusual mid-case appeal put the lawsuit on hold before deadlines to respond to subpoenas issued in December seeking tax returns, receipts and other records from more than 30 entities, including 13 Trump businesses and the federal agency that oversees the lease for Trump’s hotel.

Racine and Frosh said in a joint statement that they would not abandon their efforts.

“Although the court described a litany of ways in which this case is unique, it failed to acknowledge the most extraordinary circumstance of all: President Trump is brazenly profiting from the Office of the President in ways that no other President in history ever imagined and that the founders expressly sought — in the Constitution — to prohibit,” the attorneys general said.

Racine has previously said that if the panel ruled against Maryland and the District, the legal team would seriously consider asking for a rehearing before the full 4th Circuit. He has also said it wouldn’t surprise him if the case ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

All three judges on the panel were nominated by Republican presidents: Paul Niemeyer, by George H.W. Bush; Dennis Shedd, by George W. Bush, and A. Marvin Quattlebaum, by Trump.

A similar case brought by nearly 200 congressional Democrats in the District of Columbia’s federal court also deals with the idea that Trump is using the presidency for his personal profit, but that case is uniquely different in that the Congress is specifically mentioned in the emoluments clause itself. On Monday, the Justice Department petitioned for a writ of mandamus in the D.C. appeals court and asked for a stay on the 37 subpoenas issued in that case.

Associated Press writers Tami Abdollah in Washington and Sarah Rankin in Richmond, Virginia, contributed to this report. </s> A federal appeals court has ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of illegally profiting off the presidency through his luxury Washington hotel, handing Trump a significant legal victory on Wednesday.

A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the ruling of a federal judge in Maryland who said the lawsuit could move forward.

The state of Maryland and the District of Columbia sued in 2017, claiming Trump has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by accepting profits through foreign and domestic officials who stay at his luxury Washington hotel. The provision prohibits federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval.

The 4th Circuit found the two jurisdictions lack standing to pursue their claims against the president, and granted a petition for a rare writ of mandamus, directing U.S. District Court Judge Peter Messitte to dismiss the lawsuit.

Trump heralded the decision in a tweet, saying, "Word just out that I won a big part of the Deep State and Democrat induced Witch Hunt." Trump tweeted that he doesn't make money but loses "a fortune" by serving as president.

"The decision states that there was no legal standing to bring this lawsuit in the first place," Sekulow said a statement. "This latest effort at Presidential harassment has been dismissed with prejudice."

During oral arguments before the panel in March, lawyers for Maryland and the District said Trump's status as president is a driving factor for foreign and domestic government officials to stay at his hotel.

Just blocks from the White House, the iconic Old Post Office quickly became a hot spot for lobbyists and foreign officials after it reopened in October 2016 as the Trump International Hotel. A public relations firm working for Saudi Arabia spent nearly $270,000 on food and rooms. The Philippine and Kuwaiti embassies have also had parties there.

Maryland and the District claim they have suffered harm because more people would stay at hotels in their jurisdictions if they weren't eager to curry favor with the president by staying at his hotel.

Trump's legal team argued that Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine - both Democrats - lack authority to sue the president in his official capacity.

Trump's lawyers also argued that the emoluments clause only bars compensation made in connection with services provided in his official capacity or in "an employment-type relationship" with a foreign or domestic government.

The 4th Circuit's decision to hear the unusual mid-case appeal put the lawsuit on hold before deadlines to respond to subpoenas issued in December seeking tax returns, receipts and other records from more than 30 entities, including 13 Trump businesses and the federal agency that oversees the lease for Trump's hotel.

It appears likely the panel's ruling will not be the end of the case. Racine has said that if the panel ruled against Maryland and the District, the legal team would seriously consider asking for a rehearing before the full 4th Circuit. He also said it wouldn't surprise him if the case ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

A spokeswoman for Frosh's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Racine's office said a statement would be forthcoming.

All three judges on the panel were nominated by Republican presidents: Paul Niemeyer, by George H.W. Bush; Dennis Shedd, by George W. Bush, and Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum, by Trump.

A similar case brought by nearly 200 congressional Democrats in the District of Columbia's federal court also deals with the idea that Trump is using the presidency for his personal profit, but that case is uniquely different in that the Congress is specifically mentioned in the emoluments clause itself. On Monday, the Justice Department petitioned for a writ of mandamus in the D.C. appeals court and asked for a stay on the 37 subpoenas issued in that case.

Associated Press writers Tami Abdollah in Washington and Sarah Rankin in Richmond, Virginia, contributed to this report. </s> WASHINGTON — The state of Maryland and the District of Columbia plan to sue President Trump on Monday, alleging that he has violated the Constitution by accepting foreign money through his business empire, according to a person familiar with the plans.

The Democratic attorneys general are of Maryland and D.C.

The suit, to be filed in federal court in Maryland, will allege that Trump has violated the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which prohibits the president from accepting payments from foreign governments without the consent of Congress, according to the person.

It will cite not just the president’s luxury hotel in Washington, which has been at the center of concerns about conflicts of interest, but his worldwide network of hotels, golf courses and other commercial properties, the person said.

Despite a pledge to isolate himself from the business, Trump held on to his assets and placed them in a trust in his name. That arrangement means that he will benefit from the success of the business, even if he doesn’t reap the rewards until after he leaves office.

The suit will argue that Maryland the District of Columbia have been harmed by Trump’s ongoing ownership of the business. They plan to cite convention centers and other properties in Maryland and the district that compete with the Trump hotel.

In addition, the suit will say that states have standing to sue because they entered a contract, the Constitution, that prohibits the president from receiving emoluments. The suit will say that not just hotel payments but tax breaks and permits count as emoluments.

The suit being filed Monday will ask the court for an injunction blocking Trump from accepting foreign money, the person said. It will also ask for access to Trump’s personal tax returns as part of the legal process known as discovery, the person said.

A similar lawsuit was filed in January, moments after Trump was inaugurated, by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a government watchdog organization.

Since then, a nonprofit restaurant group, a New York hotel and restaurant owner, and a woman who books events at hotels in Washington have joined the suit as plaintiffs.

On Friday, the Justice Department asked a federal judge to dismiss the case.

CREW is outside counsel on the lawsuit the attorneys general plan to file.

The Trump Organization has promised to take steps to address some ethics concerns. It told lawmakers that it would “track and identify” revenues received by its hotels from foreign governments, which it would then donate to the U.S. Treasury.

But in documentation sent to lawmakers this year, the company said it would be “impractical” to track everyone. That means it the business will not try to identify people who haven’t specifically identified themselves as representing a foreign government.

Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, blasted that plan.

He told the company in a letter last month that Trump should either divest his ownership or get permission from Congress to accept all sources of foreign money if it’s too difficult to identify those payments. </s> July 10 (UPI) -- A federal appeals court on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit by the attorneys general of Washington, D.C., and Maryland accusing President Donald Trump of violating emoluments clauses.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the two attorneys general didn't prove their case, which argued that Trump violated the Constitution by accepting money from domestic and foreign governments through his hotels and other businesses.

The panel also said the attorneys general couldn't show that Trump's ownership of the hotels created competition with other similar businesses like convention centers.

"The District and Maryland's interest in enforcing the Emoluments Clauses is so attenuated and abstract that their prosecution of this case readily provokes the question of whether this action against the president is an appropriate use of the courts, which were created to resolve real cases and controversies between the parties," Judge Paul Niemeyer wrote in the opinion.

The three-judge panel ordered the lower court to dismiss the lawsuit.

The suit said the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., diverts customers away from businesses the District of Columbia and Maryland own, license or tax, causing those governments direct financial harm. The Trump International Hotel competes with convention facilities owned by the city's government, as well as with a resort in Prince George's County that generates tax revenue for Maryland.

The suit contended it wasn't clear whether Trump is making decisions in the country's best interest or out of "self-interested motivations grounded in the international and domestic business dealings in which President Trump's personal fortune is at stake."

Trump increases business from foreign diplomats and others doing business at his family's hotels and the restaurants, the suit alleged.

This wasn't the only lawsuit accusing Trump of violating the emoluments clause. A group of some 200 Democrats sued him on similar grounds. On Tuesday, they issued dozens of subpoenas seeking documents from Trump's private businesses. </s> The state of Maryland and the District of Columbia plan to sue President Trump on Monday, alleging that he has violated the Constitution by accepting foreign money through his business empire, according to a person familiar with the plans.

The attorneys general of Maryland and D.C., both Democrats, have scheduled a news conference for noon ET in Washington.

The suit, to be filed in federal court in Maryland, will allege that Trump has violated the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which prohibits the president from accepting payments from foreign governments without the consent of Congress, according to the person.

It will cite not just the president’s luxury hotel in Washington, which has been at the center of concerns about conflicts of interest, but his worldwide network of hotels, golf courses and other commercial properties, the person said.

The suit will ask the court for an injunction blocking Trump from accepting foreign money, the person said. It will also ask for access to Trump’s personal tax returns as part of the legal process known as discovery, the person said.

A similar was filed in January, moments after Trump was inaugurated, by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a government watchdog organization.

Since then, a nonprofit restaurant group, a New York hotel and restaurant owner, and a woman who books events at hotels in Washington have joined the suit as plantiffs.

On Friday, the Justice Department asked a federal judge to dismiss the case.

CREW is outside counsel on the lawsuit the attorneys general plan to file.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismisses a lawsuit by the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia against President Donald Trump, citing lack of legal standing in challenging payments to President Trump's private properties by foreign customers.